|
Mornacale posted:More clearly, the implication is that the public is so stupid that politicians should under no circumstances listen to us. So yeah, you could say I'm a little disturbed. Seems worse than that to me. He's smart and experienced enough to know the populist anger is a function of bankers getting a pass for trashing the system. Obviosuly, retracting finance's carte blanche would unwind the associated anger. If his glib dismissal of so much as appeasement is fairly presented, it implies that addressing the root cause is beneath consideration. If that snippet's presented fairly, it's fair to assume that a rising oligarchy is the system working as intended by his view. I could be reading into it too much, though. Over the years, every so often, I'll come across one thing or another about ole Bill-Jeff that makes him sound viciously classist/elitist and it's built up in my subconscious. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 12:56 on May 9, 2014 |
#
¿
May 9, 2014 10:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
BUSH 2112 posted:He has every right to believe it, though. He won by giving head to people who now vote for the Tea Party, and I doubt that he has even a shred of respect for those morons, who happen to make up a huge chunk of a huge chunk of our already fairly moronic society. Problem is that the worse things are, the worse the people are, and on that basis, a misanthropic leader with the quoted attitude's liable to create a positive feedback loop of shittiness. That dynamic's a big part of why I take a dim view of accelerationism.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
There's a certain amount of bald-faced fuckery in every presidential election. Claims of election stealing in Ohio basically amount to claiming the margin of victory was within the error bars. It's not that out there. By the way, Hacking Democracy (2007) is an award winning HBO investigative journalism piece into how ludicrously insecure electronic voting machines are. It seems to have hit the 'free documentary' circuit so you can find it pretty easy.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Gen. Ripper posted:This would require the foundation of our pathetic species to be anything other than hatred and spite. Hey, if monkeys can change, so can we. It's cultural; it's changeable. a shameful boehner posted:In fact, if I ever go back to school for further education, it's going to be in a trade like welding, carpentry, plumbing or some type of mechanical repair, which is probably what I should have gone to school for in the first place. IT's still a good field, though, right? Accretionist fucked around with this message at 01:29 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:What kind of satisfaction are people there deriving from extremely conservative policies? In my experience, it's culture. Emphasis on two things: assimilation to group norms as a mode of gaining/holding acceptance/standing (like playing football as a mode of gaining social acceptance in high school, graduating and drinking beers over the Sunday game to keep up the affiliations), and defending/asserting them at the group level protects their 'investment' and services social obligations. Also, I pulled this from a study on conservatism I read like 5 years ago but have forgotten. Iirc, the gist of it was, "Interpreting it as motivated reasoning works": 
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:This poo poo is beyond loving parody. I cannot believe that he in all seriousness asked half those questions. Ted Cruz's purpose is clearly to appeal to the mentally challenged.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 11:28
|
|
|
inthesto posted:Oh, I didn't mean to say that this is something you study in statistics. I meant to say that a basic statistics class can easily demonstrate an individual's difficulty with taking abstract ideas and applying them into real formulas. I like to draw on calculating standard deviation: The principle is incredibly simple, but writing out a formula with XYZ looks opaque as hell. For me, it's simple to remember "it's the measure of, on average, how much each data point differs from the mean", and then calculate from there, but most people I've met doing stats 101 could only comprehend it in the form of a plug-and-chug formula, and subsequently get lost in seconds. It really applies to most of basic statistics: Once you understand the idea behind what you're trying to calculate, actually remembering or figuring out the formula is a snap. And it's perfectly trainable. I am absolutely unable to describe it articulately, but I started trying to visualize equations more and after about a month it felt like something clicked. Math, ever since, has been about concepts and intuition and has been easy. Now, I've only gone as far as some basic calc and a smattering of 'stats for science majors interested in research' stuff, which isn't much, but it's all been easy. Math used to be my worst subject and was just inscrutable sorcery. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 01:34 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:No way. The American people have accepted that all mass shootings are isolated incidents unrelated to lax gun control. It would take armed minorities, or the homeless. 100% this. The thing there is that if you accept guns as dangers that we, as a society, choose to have, a la sports cars or alcohol, then the death rate associated with mass shootings really is low enough to warrant treating them as outlier events. If you accept the aforementioned premise, then it really is perfectly reasonable to disregard mass shootings when considering policy. Point being, it's an intractable problem. Mass shootings are a non-starter, and there's wonderful precedent for the arming of minorities manipulating legislation in favor of firearms legislation.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
effectual posted:If only the 2 year olds getting accidentally shot by their 3 year old siblings had guns as well. There should be OSHA-style gun macros getting disseminated. Firearms are dangerous in the same way as rotating equipment but everyone knows not to sit a 3-year old next to a lathe. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 08:13 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 08:08
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:If democrats advocated programs for gun safety education, would this also be touted as "taken are gons" legislation? I mean, is there anything anyone can do to sate the permanent bloodlust of gun owners for liberals? Off hand, I know that Massachusetts has a mandatory NRA Certified firearms safety course if you wanted to get carded up. Could probably extrapolate from how legislation like that's received. I remember Red Asphalt IV from Driver's Ed. It'd be hilarious to get something like that for gun owners. Probably do some good, too.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
This'll be an emotional wedge issue until we can get broad, high-quality epidemiological research into gun crime and firearms legislation to really start nailing poo poo down. The ban on the use of federal funding for 'gun control research' warrants much more attention than it presently receives.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
1337JiveTurkey posted:I sincerely hope the Republicans try to impeach Obama over their insane theories about the Benghazi attacks since politically its about as suicidal for them as impeaching Clinton for the murder of Vince Foster. I'd like to see someone push the Arkansas CIA drug running angle. That'd be much funnier and get a lot more noise out of the fringe.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
That's some [Anyone who runs, is a VC. Anyone who stands still, is a well-disciplined VC!]-poo poo Obama's got going right there.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
I think the self-image for a lot of them is 'Smart Republicans.'
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:You can call bullshit on the 'war on terror' all you want and I'm behind that, but, if you have to have the military kill someone, it's going to inspire some terror, so then every military campaign must also be a 'terror campaign' so the terror label is meaningless and not really worth bringing up unless you're trying to make an argument by emotive language. It can also serve to juxtapose current doctrine against alternatives emphasizing nation building. I've seen pitches for that on C-SPAN, talking about how we're trying to nation build and engage in 'frontier integration' style conflicts on globalization's periphery with militaries designed for great power conflicts.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:How is comparing this line of thought to the identical agenda 21 ranting of the right overblown hyperbole on my part again? It seems like for this someone could argue a mundane lack of coherence between tactics and strategy whereas for Agenda 21 you don't really have anything. Not that I would; I'd just be guessing.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
I think the whole point of barring the use of federal funds for gun control research is to keep the debate at the level of culture and emotion. The central question I'd need answered is this: To what degree does reducing gun crime reduce crime writ large? Unfortunately, I've yet to see any research which answers that question. If only some large institution with far reaching access could perform some grade-A epidemiological research into the topic...
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Nobody gives a poo poo if you don't like him, people are tired of these shootings, and want legislation, period. But is that actually a good basis for legislation? What if Elliot Rodgers simply kicked in the sorority's door and stalked through the house killing a couple dozen attractive women, leaving a few dozens grieving parents calling for an end to liberal interference with law abiding citizen's ability to have the means to defend themselves?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Yeah man, that thing that didn't happen at all is why the scenario that did should not lead to further gun legislation. It very, very easily could have. Are you going to tell me risk doesn't exist? Point is that your argument gets as far as affirming that the impetus exists, but it doesn't address the question of what do you actually pass?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Nybble posted:Ah yes, the "hero with the gun" fantasy. Well played, your hypothetical has won the argument! It would've been so easy for him to enter the house that it was luck he didn't. It's luck you aren't hearing that from the right right now. And if you were, how much should automatically cede on that basis? Anything? Obviously not. It's impetus. [Should we act] is a different matter from [How do we act].
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Would $50 million be enough to start? I wonder why Bloomberg didn't fund a huge study, rather than a fool's crusade to run ads in flyover states. I honestly don't know but I'd love to. There's an article I very vaguely recall, though, which argued that it's both an issue of funding and access. It was something about institutions like the CDC having access to [poo poo I can't remember] that a well funded university department wouldn't, and so to get really get it done, you really do need to free up federal funds. I can't remember enough to find anything making that argument, though. This ring any bells for anyone? Accretionist fucked around with this message at 23:17 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Whatever's done, the first step needs to be arming minorities to create pro-gun control momentum from the right.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Thomas Friedman gave my commencement address Oh, wow! How was it seeing his mustache in person?
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:I'm sure those who are now stuck renting will be pleased to find out who their new landlords are! The US is going to become a 400,000,000 man company town. Of course, that could the grumpiness talking. I am pretty grumpy about my terrible economic prospects.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
I rehosted the PDF here, should work: http://docdroid.net/cqfa
Accretionist fucked around with this message at 01:57 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:My conservative friends are now touting a claim that the VA is actually overfunded. They cited this, from FOX's website: I think that's their reserve/"rainy day" fund? I'm noticing that it gets smaller every year.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:The 50 cent one cracks me up everytime I see it. 
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2014 08:25
|
|
|
I can't figure out what to tell surprised and disappointed foreigners anymore so maybe something like... US Politics June - This is America; Lower your expectations
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:Perfect title. Haha, oh my god -- he's aiming for a sardonic, "Let me put this in a way you nerds will understand...," but comes short of the punchiness to make it work. I think he'd be closer with, "... when men confuse sex with rape but x1000," but that also comes short. Edit: You know who could thread that needle? Louis CK, and Oswalt's no Louis CK. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 03:51 on May 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Why does D&D go through this process of kvetching about vets benefits every few months, especially with vets who agree with you? "[Out-Group identified as part of the problem] doesn't deserve what I want," is a bipartisan sentiment!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2014 10:34
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:Jesus Christ, I don't want this either! I don't want to wish death on people, I want life to get better! Our system cannibalized the middle class to slightly increase the number of 18 year olds with birthday parties that look like this:  And all peaceful avenues of change are being shut down. Things won't be bad enough to precipitate violence for decades to come, but the decisions that will make violence inevitable are being made right now by the current crop of assholes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
im gay posted:Can someone direct me to articles/papers that discuss the possible outcomes of a minimum wage increase. Whether it's the $10.10 or $15 increase. On minimum wage increases and employment changes, or the lack thereof: http://www.nextnewdeal.net/minimum-wage-laws-and-labor-market-what-have-we-learned-card-and-kruegers-book-myth-and-measurement
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:Was someone just making a joke about unbiased sources? It lays out its own reasoning.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
joeburz posted:I'm sure glad we have a pro-business policy group to show us a valet parking receipt, looks like prime evidence for the case against minimum wage. Highlights a need to cook up some propaganda. If they're disproportionately increasing prices, it needs to be reframed from 'oh no minimum wage increases' to 'loving fuckers are price gouging, loving sons of fucks' I mean jesus, they put a line item on the receipt for 'Living Wage.' That's propaganda right there. It'd be like if I put a line for C-level executive bonuses. edit: Seriously, though, if someone made an 'amateur propaganda' thread, I'd be down. I have no idea how to design media, though. I know as much as [Use white text with black outlines] and [Use pithy phrasing]. If any of you are in media or graphic design, a primer would make a dandy OP.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:If I really had to pick one demographic that was responsible for Prop 8 passing, it'd be "religious" or "christian" for sure just based on size. But that doesn't change the fact that black people displayed significantly more support for Prop 8 than even generic "christian". That really sucks from a group that is still fighting its own civil rights struggle and is still within living memory of Jim Crow. I'll admit to skimming, but did you account for religiosity as a confound specifically vis a vis its affect on voter composition?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2014 02:31
|
|