|
? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
44 | 35.20% |
| No |
|
81 | 64.80% |
| Total: | 125 votes | ||
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
There's some info in this QCS thread: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3950003&pagenumber=1&perpage=40
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:lol this fuckin’ sucks This is hilariously terrible and deserves to be mocked
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2020 03:15
|
|
|
orange juche posted:I don't read half of people's posts As in you read every other person's post, or you check out halfway through with an "eh, I'm done"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2020 13:15
|
|
|
e: nevermind
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
UP THE BUM NO BABY posted:this has to be the dumbest post i've read and i didn't skip through bike chat I mean honestly he's not wrong. The key thing to remember is that the main stumbling block throughout the spring, summer, and fall towards getting a new stimulus is Senate Republicans. Even when Pelosi was negotiating with Mnuchin in September and October, it was clear that that nothing they'd agreed to would pass through the Senate—and the only things in McConnell's counter-proposal were things like PPP and the insane "waive COVID liabilities for businesses" proposal. Now, there's a "Framework" that at least some Senate Republicans can agree to. And key point: This is not an actual bill. It's literally a list of "we can agree on something around these numbers I guess" Like:  This is it. This is the "Bipartisan framework." It's bad and terribly insufficient, but it may also be the only thing that can get passed in the next month and a half before Biden takes office, and it's not nothing. For the Dems there's also the benefit that when Biden does take office, they'll be the ones distributing and managing funds, so there's less chance for PPP money to fall down Mnuchin's Black Hole of Graft (Which is what happened with the last round of stimulus). And if the Dems do take the Senate, nothing is stopping them from approving another, larger stimulus package with additional checks and more money for unemployment (Which is something that both Ossoff and Warnock are campaigning on). And if it falls through and Senate Republicans torpedo the deal (Which I think is pretty likely, considering how many details still need to be hashed out), at least the Dems can say they tried.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
Stravag posted:Wait i missed AFOs were getting new paint. Was there a visualization published ever? 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:I know it's cool to say that 2020 sucked, but folks, I gotta opine that this whole god drat decade was pretty much just flaccid, turgid rear end There hasn't been a good Halo game since 2010 so this checks out
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
McNally posted:I know it isn't the point, but I got curious and so far as I can dig up Marshall and Mattis were the only SecDefs who had ever worn stars, disirregardless of how many. There were some generals and admirals appointed when the position was still Secretary of War/the Navy, but appointing flag officers to the cabinet was never very common and certainly not recent.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:Yeah, all those Saudis and Afghanis pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps, America has nothing to do with their material position in the world. what even is this post
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:Hope this knocks him out for AG. I was surprised to see him "in the running" for AG at all, considering Jones feels like such a shoe-in. I have to imagine at least some (if not all) the buzz came from Cuomo and his people lobbying for the job, similar to Rahm desperately angling for Transportation Secretary. (I hope they both get hosed)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2020 18:52
|
|
|
MazelTovCocktail posted:Rahm? Yeah there's been a bunch of stories about Rahm being considered for Transportation Secretary and how he'd be a good fit... which have mostly come out of Chicago media outlets with very non-specific language and/or zero sources that aren't very obviously Rahm himself. It's pretty transparent that Rahm wants some job, any job in the upcoming position (Cabinet level if he can get it, but I have the feeling he'll take pretty much anything that gets him in the building), and he does still have allies in the party. But his main character trait of "being a giant rear end in a top hat" hasn't endeared him to a lot of people, his tenure as Obama's Chief of Staff was both controversial and self-sabotaging, and that's before you get to his actual tenure as Mayor of Chicago the massive poo poo show that was. Considering how many people loathe him (especially progressives), I don't think there's much chance he'll actually end up with a job, and almost certainly not anything that requires Senate confirmation.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
Hey, names for Transportation Secretary that aren't blatant lobbying from mayors: https://twitter.com/ClaytonGuse/status/1338262461598806016
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2020 04:48
|
|
|
On the one hand, urgh, Buttigieg. On the other hand, hahahaha, eat poo poo rahm
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2020 23:57
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Jesus, Granholm doesn't even have a B.S. She wasn't a bad governor IIRC, though she did have the bad luck to preside over the state right when the auto industry was in full meltdown during the recession. I was definitely surprised to see her name pop up though, I didn't even realize she was still in politics.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
Current stimulus negotiations status: https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1339247019597115392?s=20
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
A Bad Poster posted:Is that bullshit about making it illegal to hold companies accountable still in there? No, looks like that was taken out in exchange for the Dems holding off on money to aid state and local jurisdictions. Which of course is still monstrous, but that's the loving Republicans for you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 21:53
|
|
|
Woofer posted:everybody looting the country likes that people think there’s no alternative to PPP except going under He's not wrong, big businesses benefited in the short term from PPP but big businesses also benefit from small-to-mid sized businesses going broke since there's less competition. And for businesses like movie theaters that effectively have to stay closed for the duration of the pandemic, no amount of direct stimulus to individuals will actually help keep them afloat. Like, the execution was piss-poor and the amount of graft was huge, but there were (and are) legitimate reasons to help businesses keep people employed.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 23:42
|
|
|
Woofer posted:Stop accepting the bare minimum or expect the bare minimum. I'm not sure what you're even arguing right now??? Nobody thinks the PPP is sufficient by itself (Well except maybe some Republican Senators but nobody here is one of those), or that large businesses didn't take advantage of it while smaller companies (The intended recipients) struggled. Direct payments, PPP, enhanced unemployment, all of these things are important tools to keep people alive and healthy during the pandemic, and all of them do so in different ways.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
Woofer posted:Don’t thank people for giving you the bare minimum. Take what they give you and beat them over the head until they give you what you actually need. Cole I legitimately have no idea what you're trying to say or what you think I'm saying (Or what Best Friends is saying).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
Woofer posted:the billionaires who made millions off of PPP liked this post I understand where you're coming from and you are obviously justifiably angry but you're also being a bit of a jerk about it when you keep making these kinds of posts. It's not like Best Friends was personally responsible for the disbursement and administration of PPP loans (...Probably. Has anyone seen him and Steve Mnuchin in the same room?), and it's not like he's defending the massive corruption and graft—merely noting that in spite of the graft, the program did do a lot to help people who needed it. And obviously people should demand more direct relief, nobody disagrees with that—but another round of PPP will do good in helping people.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 00:03
|
|
|
Woofer posted:I guess since people got the bare minimum we should just let the greedy shithouse us then, then talk about how much help they gave us. You're taking a very extreme attitude here—"It helped those who didn't need it in addition to those who did need it, therefore the program was a scam" But let's frame it in another way—if someone's taking advantage of welfare, should the entire program be shut down? Because to a degree, that's what we're talking about here—welfare fraud writ large. And what I (And others) are saying is that even if the program benefited those who didn't deserve it, it helped a lot of people who did—and instead of looking at the entire program as a sham, we should instead be looking towards better management and administration of these programs, in addition to other reforms of relief.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 00:32
|
|
|
MazelTovCocktail posted:Didn’t Pelosi turn down a far better offer back in September or am I misremembering things? Sort of, but not really. Steve Mnuchin had an offer that ~800 billion larger than the current bill that's being negotiated, but it was dead on arrival since there was no chance in hell the Senate would actually vote for it, and it was questionable if Trump himself would even sign it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 04:10
|
|
|
Two more (Very good!) Biden picks: https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1339635402936885257?s=20 https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1339652193385852940?s=20
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Yeah, proper urban planning is obviously part of the space gay communist utopia. I'm not advocating that folks in the exurbs should be forced to travel for days to reach the nearest food source, you weirdos. Car-dependent sprawl just wouldn't exist. I mean the core issue is that not everyone can live (Or wants to live!) in the kinds of urban areas where the population density is great enough that public transportation is practical/economical. I've lived in the rural southwest where it takes an hour's drive to get to the nearest grocery store, and not being able to own a car in that situation is extremely crippling. I'm certainly all for better urban planning, reducing sprawl, and massively increasing public transportation, but buses and trains can't go everywhere. e: For the record I've also lived in DC, and the Metro's great! (When it's not on fire)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:Sprawl wouldn't exist without huge wealth transfers from cities. It literally did not exist prior to the post-WWII era for the most part, and infrastructure wise it still can't sustain itself (think utilities, highway costs, government redundancy, etc.) without external support. Cities (or old walkable towns of the type you see in the Midwest or East Coast) are the natural order of things.  dude I know you're passionate about this but not everyone can live in a city.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:I live in Wisconsin dude. I biked to work last winter before the pandemic hit, sure it’s not for everyone but transit or walking is also a thing. I’m not saying you can’t drive if you want, but we shouldn’t subsidize sprawl. But I'm not talking about sprawl! I'm talking farmers, ranchers, miners, loggers, park rangers, people who live in tiny towns hundreds of miles from the nearest city.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:That’s a minority of the US population, nobody is saying they can’t drive in rural areas. Stop making up ridiculous arguments here. Rural areas existed before sprawl and people drove or used horses, took trains (and yes basically any significant town was served by interurban rail lines in the Midwest and East Coast pre-car). It's because you (and some others) are acting like a smug rear end in a top hat about people's "car dependency" and then handwaving away people who are actually dependent on their car (hint: I am speaking from experience).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:Either you’re not arguing in good faith or you simply don’t know what we mean by “car dependency”. If you don’t live in a truly rural area (i.e. the people and places you mentioned) driving should be an option for your daily life, that’s all we’re saying. Look, I'm sorry, I just got set off when I tried to talk about my experience living in a rural area and you made that post about cities and sprawl. Like I said before, I'm all for public transportation and reducing dependency on cars, because it is important from an economic and environmental standpoint. And hell, if you want to talk about frustration over a lack of public transportation options, I grew up in the Detroit area, and I wish we had anything even half as good as what other cities like DC have. But when people talk about getting rid of cars, even jokingly, it can be frustrating when I've personally seen what having a car and not having a car looks like in these rural areas.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
PookBear posted:me, getting ready to confiscate acebuckeye's car it's a beat-up 2006 Ford 500 with torn seats, a hole in the rear bumper, a power-steering fluid leak, and nearly 200,000 miles on the odometer so to a degree you'd actually be doing me a favor
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2020 01:01
|
|
|
Here's a transportation subject we can all agree on: https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1339722248404443136?s=20
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
Government might shut down and stimulus could be derailed due to Republican infighting and last-second gotchas being inserted into the bill: https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1339978522333425665?s=20 https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1339979184639238146?s=20 https://twitter.com/brianschatz/status/1339940634837303298?s=20 https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1340022126317854720?s=20
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Hawley very nakedly wants to run in 2024 and is trying to set himself up as the inheritor of Trump's base, and probably recognizes that bigger checks are the best way to retain the Republican Senate majority. lol though if he ends up causing a shutdown just before christmas instead
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
There's no way in hell $2000 checks gets through the Senate, but it's still a massive unforced error by Trump—a lot of the talk about the stimulus has been around $600 being entirely insufficient, with various memes circulating around Facebook and other social media (Which we've all already seen and or/posted), and now the Dems have a massive cudgel to use against the Republicans since they can clearly and openly argue "The only obstacle between you and $2000 is Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 06:58
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:A few of the problems with extending unemployment benefits: I can say from personal experience trying to get unemployment money out of Arizona is like getting loving blood from a stone.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
The way they keep saying "female" like a pejorative is really throwing me off.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2020 00:51
|
|