We need to find the empathy to love each other in order to prevent civil war

j123 said:
PVtgr3H.gif
Click to expand...

Awesome gif. Did you make that? @j123
 
Cint said:
What's online editor?
Click to expand...
If I give it away, I wouldn't get as much likes if someone else was making Sherdog GIF edits. I'm gonna be greedy and hold a "like" monopoly like an oil tycoon ;)
 
Jack V Savage said:
I don't call Pan, theGreatA, oldshadow, Cap, etc. nutters or rubes. Just, you know, the nutters and rubes on the right.



Look, I commented before that there are intelligent, decent people all over the spectrum and assholes all over the spectrum. But there are people who believe that there are secret underground tunnels where prominent Democrats move around child sex slaves, that Obama is a secret Muslim, that Clinton has had people murdered and is a pathological liar, etc. What would you call them? Do their crazy arguments need to be addressed seriously? I'm happy to discuss the role of gov't with anyone who is serious and intelligent, but that doesn't stop me from calling out DS types.
Click to expand...
The sex dungeons conspiracy is a little nutty, as is Clintons murdering people, but for the pathological liar bit, I'd say she probably is. She's a career politician, which isn't exactly known to produce a lot of honest people, and there's plenty of footage of her lying about just weird stuff that doesn't even really benefit her, like being under sniper fire, the confusion about her collapsing in NYC.

And for the Obama being a Muslim thing, I don't think he's a Muslim, and I also don't think he's not from America, especially since I live a few towns over from his old high school, but surely you can admit that his background is more complicated than most. A Muslim-raised atheist dad, I think Christian grandparents, his mom moved to the most heavily populated Muslim country in the world with his Muslim stepdad, a lot of his siblings are Muslim, then he lived with his parents for a minute, then just his mom, then his grandparents after his mom moved away, then back with the mom again Whether or not he himself is Muslim doesn't matter, and I wouldn't care if he was, but IMO it's fair to ask whether having so many Muslim influences has had any effect on the way he treats Islamic terrorist groups and threats, his original desire to close the detention center for terrorists, him calling an Islamic terrorist attack "workplace violence", and another an "anti-gay" attack, and saying in another that "we shouldn't jump to conclusions" when it was obvious what happened, calling ISIS "the JV squad" that wasn't a problem. I can't think of many other Christians who give speeches mocking the bible. If I had to guess, I'd say he's mostly likely an atheist who went to church because it helps political aspirations, but I don't really care.

As for role of gov't, I think they are biting off more than they can chew. They are supposed to just be there to keep the train on the track, and this country is too big for the federal gov't to dip their fingers in everything. I don't want the gov't to "care about me"; I don't even want them to know where I live. Things just run better when they stay out of it, and when they don't, we get college tuition skyrocketing, wages shrinking, people needing food stamps.
 
Last edited:
nostradumbass said:
The sex dungeons conspiracy is a little nutty, as is Clintons murdering people, but for the pathological liar bit, I'd say she probably is. She's a career politician, which isn't exactly known to produce a lot of honest people, and there's plenty of footage of her lying about just weird stuff that doesn't even really benefit her, like being under sniper fire, the confusion about her collapsing in NYC.

And for the Obama being a Muslim thing, I don't think he's a Muslim, and I also don't think he's not from America, especially since I live a few towns over from his old high school, but surely you can admit that his background is more complicated than most. A Muslim-raised atheist dad, I think Christian grandparents, his mom moved to the most heavily populated Muslim country in the world with his Muslim stepdad, a lot of his siblings are Muslim, then he lived with his parents for a minute, then just his mom, then his grandparents after his mom moved away, then back with the mom again Whether or not he himself is Muslim doesn't matter, and I wouldn't care if he was, but IMO it's fair to ask whether having so many Muslim influences has had any effect on the way he treats Islamic terrorist groups and threats, his original desire to close the detention center for terrorists, him calling an Islamic terrorist attack "workplace violence", and another an "anti-gay" attack, and saying in another that "we shouldn't jump to conclusions" when it was obvious what happened, calling ISIS "the JV squad" that wasn't a problem. I can't think of many other Christians who give speeches mocking the bible. If I had to guess, I'd say he's mostly likely an atheist who went to church because it helps political aspirations, but I don't really care.
Click to expand...
You forgot Ahmed and his fake bomb got invited to the White House.
 
Every empire in history has fallen from the inside. America wont be any different.
 
I don't think there's any point in discussing the stuff I mentioned. They're all obviously fake stuff that people believe for partisan reasons. Good for you if you don't accept them (except one).

nostradumbass said:
As for role of gov't, I think they are biting off more than they can chew. They are supposed to just be there to keep the train on the track, and this country is too big for the federal gov't to dip their fingers in everything. I don't want the gov't to "care about me"; I don't even want them to know where I live. Things just run better when they stay out of it, and when they don't, we get college tuition skyrocketing, wages shrinking, people needing food stamps.
Click to expand...

Wages aren't shrinking, and if they were, what would you think the cause is? People need food stamps because we have certain large portions of the population that doesn't work--children (who are almost half of SNAP recipients), the elderly, and the disabled being the big three. It's inevitable in any market-based economy that about a fifth of the population--almost all people who fall into one of those three groups (about three-quarters) plus people taking care of people in at least one of those groups (about a fifth) will not get enough market income to meet basic needs. I would support eliminating SNAP in exchange for cash benefits for people in those groups (plus some relief for college students and the unemployed).
 
Jack V Savage said:
I don't think there's any point in discussing the stuff I mentioned. They're all obviously fake stuff that people believe for partisan reasons. Good for you if you don't accept them (except one).



Wages aren't shrinking, and if they were, what would you think the cause is? People need food stamps because we have certain large portions of the population that doesn't work--children (who are almost half of SNAP recipients), the elderly, and the disabled being the big three. It's inevitable in any market-based economy that about a fifth of the population--almost all people who fall into one of those three groups (about three-quarters) plus people taking care of people in at least one of those groups (about a fifth) will not get enough market income to meet basic needs. I would support eliminating SNAP in exchange for cash benefits for people in those groups (plus some relief for college students and the unemployed).
Click to expand...
I suppose it would be more accurate for me to say that prices are increasing, as opposed to saying wages are shrinking. I meant wages are shrinking in relation to costs of living, cause I guess the wage increase would be fine if we were in Bolivia.

IMO, the cause is most likely corporatism and the fact that gov't says "we'll just pay you the rest with federal money". Nobody would take these jobs if it wasn't probably still ok cause you can count on the gov't to pick up the slack, and these places would be left with no employees and would go out of business. I should be the one calling people "nutters" when they claim that me opposing MW hikes is because I think workers should just make less. It's because I think taking a job as one of the first employees for a small company, where you might take less for like 2 seconds until the company makes money, is a better deal than just having Walmart pay you more for a job with no advancement and that's all you'll ever make. I would much prefer a place with more business owners who have fewer employees running a company than a few companies with HR departments and 20 goddamn steps between an employee and their boss, usually because it's been made impossible for anyone who isn't already rich to start a business.
 
nostradumbass said:
I suppose it would be more accurate for me to say that prices are increasing, as opposed to saying wages are shrinking. I meant wages are shrinking in relation to costs of living, cause I guess the wage increase would be fine if we were in Bolivia.
Click to expand...

No, real (that is, inflation adjusted) wages rose at their fastest level ever last year and are at all-time highs. Inflation can't have a long-term effect on any prices, and the short-term effect is how it affects behavior. Think about it. People are paid based on leverage and supply and demand. That doesn't change if prices rise. Or think about it this way: $30K in 1960 would be worth about $250K today. Does that mean that secretaries today would be living the lifestyle of someone making $250K if there had been no inflation? Of course not.

nostradumbass said:
IMO, the cause is most likely corporatism and the fact that gov't says "we'll just pay you the rest with federal money". Nobody would take these jobs if it wasn't probably still ok cause you can count on the gov't to pick up the slack, and these places would be left with no employees and would go out of business.
Click to expand...

If your behavior model is correct (it's not), it would just mean that corporate profits and taxes or debt would be lower and everyone's living standards would be the same.

nostradumbass said:
I should be the one calling people "nutters" when they claim that me opposing MW hikes is because I think workers should just make less.
Click to expand...

I don't think that, but I think you're wrong to some degree. I mean, I have posted here many times that I strongly oppose a national $15/hr MW, as that's above-median in some places and could actually have really bad effects. That kind of a jump is unprecedented as far as I'm aware (even phased in over a couple of years). But some MW is consistent (historically) with full employment, and small increases don't appear to cause disemployment effects. The way I look at it is that employment markets are very from perfect (http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=perfect-market), especially at the low end, and the imperfections are in the direction of reducing wages. A MW is a corrective to that and protects low-skill workers from being exploited.
 
I can get down with some of this. I don't sign in too often but when I do, I can get a little assholish with my replies. Doesn't really help anyone.

Let's make the WR Great Again (there's not really a great acronym for that). Wouldn't know how to pronounce MWRGA.

My excuse is all the crazy shit that happened in 2016 and how it was juST FUCKING ACCEPTED AS NORMAL......

Nevermind. I kind of agree. Let's try to have better conversations. Empathy is good (even though it's mostly one sided mumble mumble mumble) but has to start somewhere.

I'll try but promise nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,928
Messages
55,455,669
Members
174,786
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top