|
Godholio posted:An F-18. A tornado too! I’ll feel free to annoyed post how the most plausible reason the F-18 got shot down is that a dumbass F-16 driver was lost and shot a missile into a Patriot unit negligently.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
psydude posted:I'm sitting here reading this article about the GotV effort for black voters in Alabama and I'm thinking, why hasn't anyone come up with a ride sharing app for people to request a ride to the polls on election day? Watch James O’Keefe do some stunt where some actor in blackface calls for a ride even though they have a Porsche in the driveway, obviously paid for with their welfare check via your tax dollars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:30
|
|
psydude posted:I'm sitting here reading this article about the GotV effort for black voters in Alabama and I'm thinking, why hasn't anyone come up with a ride sharing app for people to request a ride to the polls on election day? this would be great for the reaction it would get from republicans about bussing in illegal voters, if nothing else.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:A tornado too! I'd want nothing less. All's far in love and war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:It's a big technical/social problem. The technical and logistical challenges aren't too difficult to overcome. While most "ride to the polls" measures focus on the elderly, many young minority voters don't have cars but do have phones and would probably need to be picked up from work and dropped off at home or vice versa. It wouldn't replace old school ride to the polls efforts, just augment it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
psydude posted:The technical and logistical challenges aren't too difficult to overcome. While most "ride to the polls" measures focus on the elderly, many young minority voters don't have cars but do have phones and would probably need to be picked up from work and dropped off at home or vice versa. It wouldn't replace old school ride to the polls efforts, just augment it. Next step is voting via app. Which James O'Keefe will use to justify defunding the Federal Election Commission.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Or everyone could just vote by mail, like in Washington, Oregon, and Colorado.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:A tornado too! I like how in the Wikipedia article the Tornado is listed like an achievement: Wikipedia posted:Battery D, 5-52d ADA shot down the first Scud launched by Iraqi forces during the opening days of the invasion. Battery C, 5-52d ADA ended the war with the highest number of intercepted missiles totaling 3, battery C also shot down a British Tornado aircraft. While the F-18 is listed as a tragic accident: Wikipedia posted:A few days later, Battery E fired two PAC-3 missiles and shot down U.S. Navy F-18 pilot Nathan White outside of the Karbala (he avoided the first missile, but not the second one). He was found dead in one of the few lakes in Iraq. This friendly fire incident sidelined Battery E... Anta fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Ardlen posted:Or everyone could just vote by mail, like in Washington, Oregon, and Colorado. Taking away these things suppresses turnout, allowing officials to pander to a narrower base.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I'd want nothing less. All's far in love and war. Anta posted:I like how in the Wikipedia article the Tornado is listed like an achievement: Among the community, the Tornado gets highlighted way more. That's, IMO, because it was a foreign aircraft. The shootdown of the Tornado was not nearly as dumb as the shootdown of the F-18. First, before someone calls in NSA Wizard, I've ensured that all of this is available through incident reports available to the public. Very, very brief rundown of both shootdowns: All of the following took place in 12 days of combat, IIRC. During this time, Patriot units engaged multiple ballistic missiles successfully. At the time, some Patriot units were operating as autonomous batteries, disconnected from joint links and basically using a bunch of voice radio connections back to a Marine corps Tactical Air Operations Center. This is not ideal. The result of these incidents was a change to training, software, hardware, manning, doctrine, and more. The Tornado didn't have IFF codes loaded and that was in a way that, IIRC, was invisible to the crew. So they weren't squawking but didn't know it. In a two-ship, one of the Tornadoes broke formation and dove directly at the Patriot site, resembling ordnance to both the crew and the software. The Tornado was engaged as an anti-radiation missile (ARM) and the result was the destruction of the Tornado and death of two RAF aviators. This was conducted entirely within the rules of ROE, though in hindsight the lack of credible ARM threat could have led to a crew choosing to override the ROE and system to stop this incident. An F-16 pilot lost track of where he was. He thought he was in enemy territory. He wasn't. His radar warning receiver misclassified a Patriot site as an enemy SAM site. Given that he didn't notice that he was in friendly territory, he apparently didn't question this. He shot at a Patriot unit with an AGM-88 HARM from behind, and later he claimed he was "locked up" by Patriot. This was not true. His missile destroyed one of the latest-model Patriot radars in theater. An older model radar was rushed to the front to replace the blown up radar, and that can affect classification of targets. A few days later, an F-18 left the planned air corridors for reasons unknown, last I checked. Radars spotted the F-18 and and classified him as a theater ballistic missile (TBM). This was a poor classification, given that he was an F-18. Patriot engaged the F-18. The F-18 pilot saw the launch, not knowing it was at him, but still evaded. Patriot interceptors hit his plane and killed him. This part is largely based on my opinion: The F-18 shootdown is dumber than the Tornado kill. The F-18 was squawking mode 2 codes. It was outside of its designated flight path, but it was not flying the way a TBM does. The Tornado, by comparison, was squawking no codes and flying like ordnance. The Patriot controller, in the case of the F-18, thought it was very important to point out that the ops center was bugging him for reports or some poo poo over voice comms.* Most of my training was a few years after this clusterfuck, so hindsight 20/20 etc. I can say with confidence that I doubt I would've shot down the F-18 given my training. I can't say the same for the Tornado shootdown. That was a "perfect storm" of lack of IFF, breaking from flight plans, ROE, and system parameters that really set up the aviators to get killed and the ground crew to kill said aviators. ROE and comms are important, folks! *welcome to your job
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Why would a tornado that is friendly dive at a patriot site? For the lolz? How does an F-18 I assume with gps and awacs and everything else on board get lost? That seems way odd.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
There's a lot of poo poo happening during military operations. People are running on no sleep (oftentimes for days), are dehydrated, stressed out, pissed off, bored, and scared. Perfect recipe for stupid poo poo to happen and people to die accidentally.
psydude fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Anta posted:I like how in the Wikipedia article the Tornado is listed like an achievement: Remember 1776, motherfucker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The argument against high taxes on rich people I always hear is that it would discourage people from working hard to make more money. Most of the people who work the hardest get paid poo poo, and vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Blind Rasputin posted:Why would a tornado that is friendly dive at a patriot site? For the lolz? Hornets of that vintage had microfiche in a convex fishbowl for a map. I can almost guarantee he didn't have it turned on because the fucker never worked and probably didn't have maps for that area even if it did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The argument against high taxes on rich people I always hear is that it would discourage people from working hard to make more money. This makes a false assumption that working hard makes you rich; it doesn't. Working smart can. I watch people do lovely, hard, back-breaking work every day but those fucks aren't getting rich ever. The smart guy who is paying them to do that work though, he's getting rich. Proud Christian Mom fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
first, https://twitter.com/markgongloff/status/943226253921996800 Also, I work for a religious school. I don't make poo poo for pay since we keep tuition as low as possible and I can tell the kids who just transferred from public school because they're behind everyone and have poo poo work habits. Which is sad, because it's not like we're super hardcore in academics. A lot of urban and majority-minority suburban public schools are in terrible shape, you have to see it to understand. Like, half our students aren't even Catholic, their parents send them here because the public school is that bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
egyptian rat race posted:I'm having a lot of discussions with friends and family about this. What does responsible consumption look like for someone who calls themselves a humanist? A Christian? I really think before we start navel gazing about what might be the theoretical limit of sustainable care is, we need to get to "at least as good as the countries that have better outcomes than us at half the per capita cost." Also come up with a plan for what the people currently employed by flushing 9% of the US GDP down the toilet are going to do once we unfuck our health care system, because otherwise that's a recipe for more terribleness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The argument against high taxes on rich people I always hear is that it would discourage people from working hard to make more money. "Would you rather get to keep 80% of $100,000 and have to give 20% away, or get to keep 50% of $500,000 and give the other 50% away? If the former, do you think everyone is as dumb as you?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
A $12,000/yr UBI would be a good start. No work requirement. Doesn't count toward income. No limits on what you can use it for. No lien able to garnish it. $1000, every month, no exceptions. Yeah that's a $4.2 trillion annual line item, but if the republicans can claim trickle down gains to full tax holes then I've got a stronger argument that regular people spending generates even more federal tax revenue overall
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Man this thread moves quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:A $12,000/yr UBI would be a good start. No work requirement. Doesn't count toward income. No limits on what you can use it for. No lien able to garnish it. $1000, every month, no exceptions. Neither party is particularly interested in finding the money to stop stripping surviving spouses of deceased retirees and servicemembers of their DOD benefits, which in many cases was bought into, because they're receiving a VA benefit. Can't imagine they'd be keen on spending $4.2 trillion to give everybody money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Maybe I was too hungover to understand that class, but I thought picking fights with publisher/editors was considered poor tradecraft. https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/943295726871896064 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943297545907957762 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943300175640121345 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943311828389715968 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943313611690336256 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943314096501526528 https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/943315152081956864 https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/943320848215224320 Ceiling fan fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:"Would you rather get to keep 80% of $100,000 and have to give 20% away, or get to keep 50% of $500,000 and give the other 50% away? If the former, do you think everyone is as dumb as you?" Dumbed down version: Are you dumb as loving gently caress and bad at math? If so, get mad about graduated tax rates!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
egyptian rat race posted:I'm having a lot of discussions with friends and family about this. What does responsible consumption look like for someone who calls themselves a humanist? A Christian? Doing CPR on people who really shouldn't be full code isn't a major driver of health care costs, I'll do that all day. It's everything leading up to that. If we go to a single payer national health system, someone has to be the guy that says, "we are ceasing artificial feeding on your vegetable grandmother because we think improvement is unlikely and continuing to artificially feed a vegetable is economically irresponsible" or "your developmentally disabled son will forever be the last priority for a transplant and will likely die of his illness because our spreadsheet says that his life is literally worth less than that of a similar not disabled person." A few of us might be willing to be that guy, but those positions are unsurprisingly super unpopular and probably can't survive in a democracy where people haven't embraced cold blooded realism and adherence to formulaic outcomes as governing principles. And if we're going to draw a line under this whole democratic experiment and instead impose technocratic best solutions on people (gently caress their feelings,) then simply trading our political freedoms for making GBS threads on people with sick relatives they unreasonably want to keep alive isn't nearly a fair trade, and we need to be taking it a lot farther. On a global scale, we're stuck between the same rock and hard place. Like, saving ourselves and some semblance of the natural world as we know it realistically would involve brutally killing anyone trying to clear-cut rainforest, or making deliberate choices on how many people we will design our systems to support, but the history of those choices is so poisonous and fraught that most people are willing to accept a 6th mass extinction, plowing all arable land into farms, and slowly cooking ourselves to death with ghgs than even speak about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If you're talking about specialists, you're not just talking about primary care. And people won't be satisfied with just primary care either; "You have bone cancer. Here is some 800mg Motrin. I hope you can actually afford a cure." Here's what that looks like in real life. Welp that's depressing
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
Yeah, it's depressing as gently caress. People ask me why I always seem pessimistic and don't want kids.M_Gargantua posted:A $12,000/yr UBI would be a good start. No work requirement. Doesn't count toward income. No limits on what you can use it for. No lien able to garnish it. $1000, every month, no exceptions. mlmp08 posted:Dumbed down version: Are you dumb as loving gently caress and bad at math? If so, get mad about graduated tax rates!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If you're talking about specialists, you're not just talking about primary care. And people won't be satisfied with just primary care either; "You have bone cancer. Here is some 800mg Motrin. I hope you can actually afford a cure." Here's what that looks like in real life. Insurance panels for denying coverage are effectively the same thing for poor people. But the split between insurer and insuree provides the psychological distance needed to do just that, as well as a change in perspective. The current system has death as the default, and treatment as a gift to those able to afford it. But single payer has treatment as the default, so the bureaucracy is denying care to sick relatives, instead of failing to give care to sick relatives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
I mean seriously we're acting like we don't already have death panels
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 05:35
|
|
|
My unpopular take on how to get healthcare in the US to be feasible is to stop reproducing, and make getting snipped/tied a requirement for zero-premium universal healthcare. If you can prove yourself economically stable enough to be able to have children without falling back into that hole where you and your family can't survive, rad. You can have kids. And you can contribute some extra cash flow to the healthcare system. BC is one of the last provinces in Canada to have healthcare premiums, and while it's not strictly necessary (the budget is there that we could abolish them and not have a deficit) they work out so that if you're literally does-not-have-to-pay-income-taxes broke, you don't pay a cent for UHC, and as you get out of that danger zone you start having to chip into the healthcare fund just like everyone else. Right now I'm paying $75/month for my healthcare, and that covers everything up to and including a vegetative spiral into palliative care and life support in the hopefully incredibly unlikely event I get diagnosed tomorrow with super-cancer. Ontario rolls similar numbers into their provincial income tax. This is theoretically sustainable based solely by looking at GDP per capita comparisons between Canada and the US (the US wins by about 20%) but there are much larger problems with sustaining an implementation of UHC like this in the US that, in my opinion, can really only be solved by not letting the population grow. I'm not saying "kill every invalid and senior citizen", before someone asks. e: I have misappraised the situation. Apologies. Kazinsal fucked around with this message at 08:16 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Why does DR not source his quotes, at least tell people which newspaper comment section you get this poo poo from. Shrieking about QALYs but only when it's a public entity doing it is like the kind of poo poo a racist barely-literate uncle pastes from outlook to facebook.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 06:15
|
|
|
Tax bill just passed the senate Hail SS-18 Satan
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:My unpopular take on how to get healthcare in the US to be feasible is to stop reproducing, and make getting snipped/tied a requirement for zero-premium universal healthcare. If you can prove yourself economically stable enough to be able to have children without falling back into that hole where you and your family can't survive, rad. You can have kids. And you can contribute some extra cash flow to the healthcare system. lol middle class families are literally a cancer diagnosis away from being in the poor house and your solution is "Only the rich can breed." any other dumbfuck hot takes you have?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Literally eugenics is the answer to class imbalance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:25
|
|
|
If minorities cant breed then the whole racism problem becomes a problem you dont have to solve in a couple generations. Eugenics is the laziest offensive intelectual hot topic that edgy teens start to believe without thinking about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:lol middle class families are literally a cancer diagnosis away from being in the poor house and your solution is "Only the rich can breed." Regrettably yes, but it is you know a sacrifice for the future of the human race.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:32
|
|
|
I mean Kazinsal's post was exactly what the US' eugenics program was until it was abolished in the loving 1970s. If you're poor and somehow wind up committed to an institution or in the prison system? Congratulations, you might wind up the compulsory beneficiary of forced sterilization, "for the betterment of the human race".
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Regrettably yes, but it is you know a sacrifice for the future of the human race. counter point the rich have been our leaders and gotten us to the point where we are maybe they shouldn't breed
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Third World Reggin posted:counter point I mean they already kind of aren't? I'd have to look at the stats but don't rich rear end people ( not counting religious nuts) barely breed at replacement numbers? Maybe it's the self loathing of skull loving society who knows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
Laranzu posted:I mean they already kind of aren't? I'd have to look at the stats but don't rich rear end people ( not counting religious nuts) barely breed at replacement numbers? hmm replaceable numbers huh that sure sounds like breeding
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 08:01
|
|