|
Awfully nice of him to acknowledge the level of intelligence for anyone outraged at another person for reading a book by explaining what "post-" means.
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Beamed posted:So I think I know the answer to this, but is this seriously a thing? Tl;dr is that Fox News guy claims 4 terrorists were arrested at the border, and presumably we're all about to die. No idea where they got border from. Supposedly the guy was detained in Houston. Of course the only mentions I can find of it are on right wings sites (there was a big thread about it on stormfront) They all turn up only this photo  I found a reddit thread somebody claimed to have seen the guy at his mosque before and they tried to have him arrested for trespassing. Somehow it wouldn't surprise me it's FBI trying to catch "terrorists"
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
That's definitely an HPD uniform, but that guy practically looks like a dumbass pretending to be a terrorist. Are we sure they didn't arrest James O'Keefe?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Probably should've taken the terrorist uniform off before trying to cross.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:Probably should've taken the terrorist uniform off before trying to cross. Adidas is a well-known terror rug manufacturer, I understand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:So... wtf? Goons are crappy advocates for nuclear power, they tend to condescendingly belittle concerns people have about it rather than properly explain why it isn't actually a problem.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Adidas is a well-known terror rug manufacturer, I understand. Between that and Russian mobster tracksuits they are just awash in dirty money
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Radio Nowhere posted:Tonight at a bar I saw a new graphic on Fox News on how the poor aren't really poor in this country, no mention of refrigerators but something like 80%+ have microwaves! I think it was a piece on O'Reilly but I really was trying to have a good time with friends. gently caress you Fox for distracting me. Property managers figured out a long time ago that it was more efficient to just own the basic appliances themselves and amortize the costs through rents. It's a hell of a lot better than having everyone lug fridges around with each move as well. Remind me again why the GOP is the party of smartypants business? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
hamster_style posted:Haven't seen this posted yet, but apparently the Right has a new "race guru" Link Reading all of that, and without checking on the dude's history: I get the strong impression that he was born three quarters of the way up the ladder and when he made it up to the ledge he kicked it away and now asks why everyone on the ground aren't up there already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:The only thing I ever saw was a meme talking about Obunger reading "The Post-American World" Oh man thank god that image explained what post meant or else I'd think Obama was reading up on the American postal system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
nuclear power didn't fail because of greens, it failed because nuclear plants are expensive and take too long to build.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Goons are crappy advocates for nuclear power, they tend to condescendingly belittle concerns people have about it rather than properly explain why it isn't actually a problem. His argument amounted to "I don't think nuclear is necessary. Why aren't you respecting my concerns?" TheDeadlyShoe posted:nuclear power didn't fail because of greens, it failed because nuclear plants are expensive and take too long to build. So are other renewables, that's gotten around with them by large tovernment subsidies. Why weren't subsidies used for nuclear? Hmmmmm
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Opposition to nuclear has always struck me as being very much of the "lots of people are very vocally against it so there must be something to their concerns, right?????????" kind
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
quote:RUSH: Now, may I remind you, was it last year or the year before when I, who am totally tuned in to this, very conscious and very aware, I was able, my instincts alone, to sense -- it started with this concussion business -- that there were forces out there that were out for this game, that had targeted this game in a political sense. This is what's the toughest thing to make people believe. Because football, sports, is for everybody, an escape from politics. But this is a pure political agenda now that's gotten itself intertwined with the NFL. Make no mistake about it.  Goodness, Rush is really enjoying himself talking about how football is all stinky and dumb now, isn't he? Tell us more about how
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
So do something about it. Hippies are not the major driver of bad PR for nuclear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
I have to wonder how much it has to do with the oil and gas industries. Granted, without any evidence to back my wondering up besides the way they tend to be such slimeballs.Intel&Sebastian posted:So do something about it. Hippies are not the major driver of bad PR for nuclear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
There's always NIMBYism, I guess, but I don't think there's many more people who'd want a huge coal plant in their backyard, than would want a nuclear plant. Hell, people get up in arms about solar panels and windmills and both of those are pretty good neighbors compared to most other types of power plant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:So do something about it. Hippies are not the major driver of bad PR for nuclear. They certainly aren't helping. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:His argument amounted to "I don't think nuclear is necessary. Why aren't you respecting my concerns?" Because my arguments have never once amounted to, "I don't think nuclear is necessary." If your premise is that I have said this, would you please quote it so I can examine what I said and clarify? I already know why certain people are not respecting my concerns (regarding energy storage, not nuclear power). As far as I have noticed, it has nothing to do with avocation for or against nuclear-powered electricity generation. I'll say it AGAIN: I prefer nuclear to coal and natural gas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
I just find it a little coincidental that the one area where Hippies have finally trumped big money and the energy industry also happens to be the one with a couple of pretty epic disasters on it's record too. It'd be like if we passed gun control after Sandy Hook and the NRA told everyone it was exclusively Obama's fault. The incidents people remember are real, weren't caused by tie dyed grandmas, and they're what's doing it. TL;DR - Imagine the situation minus hippies. Now you just have an energy industry on the verge of Texas$ saying "Nah, THIS time we are all good". Not exactly a walk in the park. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I just find it a little coincidental that the one area where Hippies have finally trumped big money and the energy industry also happens to be the one with a couple of pretty epic disasters on it's record too.. Are you referring to the 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill, or some or all of these or some other fossil fuel catasrophes, or are you talking about nuclear power plant problems, or something else. I can't tell. The "hippy" label is throwing me off, because I'm only 42 and my family is extremely conservative and they love fossil fuels. Someone in my family is a high level executive in a huge power company.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Maybe you guys could take this to the energy generation thread. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3505076 Also never ever listen to a man that uses the word "boondoggle."
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:Are you referring to the 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill, or some or all of these or some other fossil fuel catasrophes, or are you talking about nuclear power plant problems, or something else. I can't tell. Nuclear. Regardless of the validity or unfairness of how they're singled out the problem remains the same. My point is it's a lame canard to think we'd be living in a nuclear paradise if only X people would stop poo poo talking it. Fossil gets away with their own disasters because we've built a society around it. Nuclear doesn't have that, but it does have some splashy and exciting disasters associated directly with it. Like I said, unfair? Maybe. But the bulk of the blame is on the industry itself, not the Sierra Club or whatever. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
I've been trying not to feed this derail but I have one thing to add: nuclear requires greater state involvement than fossil fuels because of the R&D and weaponization aspect. This limits innovation. Then you have the existing energy/mining/drilling industry partnering up with luddites and NIMBYs (covertly, for the most part) to undermine adoption and development.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:The only thing I ever saw was a meme talking about Obunger reading "The Post-American World" O.... M.... G!!!!!!!!! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
That radical America-hating Islamist, Fareed Zakaria.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
quote:So are other renewables, that's gotten around with them by large tovernment subsidies. Why weren't subsidies used for nuclear? Hmmmmm it pretty much comes down to the long timeframe, you have to sink a huge amount of money to build a nuclear plant and it takes a LONG TIME to build one. The money spends so long doing nothing that its noncompetitive with other investment opportunities. Additionally, nuclear plants have a very bad habit of construction cost overruns and long delays. OTOH you can just throw up a wind tower and they're figuring out how to roboticize installation of solar mirrors. *shrug* in order to pretend i'm posting on topic: foxnews radioactive boars! quote:Radioactive wild boars are reportedly roaming the forests of Germany, some giving off such high levels of radiation that they’re unfit for human consumption nearly three decades after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Nuclear IS subsidized heavily. You can't say we haven't given nuclear a fair shake. In recent terms, during the Bush Administration the government offered huge no-risk loan guarantees and banks were still very leery of nuclear projects. To be fair to nuclear though, modern-day bank executives are not interested in investments with a payoff any longer than their expected tenure because bonuses and stock options pay out based on next quarter's numbers. If you offer a banker an investment that pays out 2 dollars a month but is virtually guaranteed to lose a trillion dollars five years from now he will take it and give you a blowjob to thank you as long as he can find a way to fudge the books enough to keep the expected losses from showing up in the financial statements.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Adidas is a well-known terror rug manufacturer, I understand. All Day I Dream About Shag
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Additionally, nuclear plants have a very bad habit of construction cost overruns and long delays. This is because smart people come up with excellent designs and then Bush hands a pile of cash to a known shyster. Also never look at cost overruns on early conventional plants.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:We were on the Gold Standard in the 1930s too. Well for that one they'll say it doesn't count cause the fed was already established by that point. Same reason why wall street can't be held responsible for the 2008 crash. Btw, speaking of libertarians, has this story been posted already? quote:Welcome to Galt’s Gulch Chile, a libertarian refuge from the coming economic, social, and political collapse of the United States. The would-be free-market utopia, named after the mountain redoubt of the protagonist of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, is taking advance payments (Bitcoins gladly accepted) for parcels on its 11,000 acres. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/15/libertarian-utopia-styled-after-ayn-rand-book-spectacularly-falls-apart-almost-immediately/ I'm sure you could guess how that experiment turned out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Moktaro posted:Property managers figured out a long time ago that it was more efficient to just own the basic appliances themselves and amortize the costs through rents. It's a hell of a lot better than having everyone lug fridges around with each move as well. Because if you removed the refrigerators and kept the rent the same you could make more money. Aside from that if you cut out programs that cost taxes then you can reduce the tax burden on the people that actually pay taxes meaning, of course, the non-poor, who deserve some extra compensation for their generous support of the poor in the form of jobs and wages. Really, the poor should subsist entirely on room-temperature, flavorless nutrient gruel from cans and loving like it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Nutrient paste? Only after sterilizations. God bless the unborn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
So this crossed my facebook https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w As far as I can tell, the AEI is just scraping reddit for anti-sarkeesian arguments and repeating them back in order to attract subscribers. She's on the same scripts as dozens of angry balding nerds were months ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
I have never met a libertarian who wasn't an rear end in a top hat. I hope to perhaps one day but does such a rare creature exist?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
I've known a few who were alright provided you didn't talk politics too much. But that applies to a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:I've known a few who were alright provided you didn't talk politics too much. But that applies to a lot of people. Interestingly, most of the libertarians I've met - online and off - don't reveal their political ideology until much later, giving me time to see all the ways they're an rear end in a top hat aside from being libertarian.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
I met a libertarian once while I was watching jets land at Nellis Air Force Base. He was polite, I guess, and British, which was weird. There were a couple of layers of irony in his talking about the huge national debt as most airplanes in the USAF inventory including a goddamn B-2 flew over. We brought up the exact same example scenario about banks lending money with a gold standard (issuing more money than there was gold) but I tried to use that as a point against the gold standard, while he seemed to think it was a problem with either the banks or damned dirty fiat money, I'm not sure. Like I said, it was weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Ninjasaurus posted:I have never met a libertarian who wasn't an rear end in a top hat. I hope to perhaps one day but does such a rare creature exist? Depends on where you look but my experience has been that older libertarians are generally chill dudes that genuinely care about the freedom of others. I'm talking guys 50+ years old that are old school libertarians. Younger libertarians subscribe to the newer, Republican, gently caress you got mine version. The older ones like ideas like free money for food or education for those that can't afford those things and follow the philosophy of "the government should be as small as possible." These are the guys that think the government should absolutely step in and solve problems whenever necessary and be more of a watcher than anything. Places where poo poo's working just fine should have the government's hands off but soon as something breaks the government steps in and fixes everything because, you know, poo poo happens. That's what silly things like disaster relief funds are for. These are the guys that understand why having things like for-profit fire departments are a loving awful idea. This demographic is also not only shrinking thanks to the fact that they're old and dying but also because libertarianism got hijacked by the right. I'm still a registered libertarian and believe the same things that the old dudes I learned it from talked about but have generally abandoned the party simply because, like has been pointed out, it's now full of sociopaths and assholes. I find the current idea of "literally everything must be profitable or it is wrong" to be batshit insane. There are some things you don't throw money at to get more money back. You don't drop a big bag of money in a library to get a bigger bag of money back you drop off the big bag of money and say "hey thanks for the library, keep it up!" and leave knowing that the library has all sorts of benefits. The current version of libertarianism is "the government should be smaller than it is right now." One of the ironies of current libertarian philosophy is that it is actually detrimental to freedom. Meritocracy vanishes when a brilliant but poor child can't get a proper education because his parents can't afford it or because he starts working at 7 so he doesn't starve.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
None of that sounds like libertarianism. But I guess the term is so diluted now that anything not-liberal can be referred to as libertarian. Sir Tonk fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 05:02
|
|