|
I think the problem is they dont want helping others on a macro scale. If it's personal it's warm and comforting and other nice images. A government agency projects images of shadowy figures orchestrating some malevolent purpose.
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 21:44 |
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I think the problem is they dont want helping others on a macro scale. If it's personal it's warm and comforting and other nice images. A government agency projects images of shadowy figures orchestrating some malevolent purpose. 1) They don't want to be forced to give anything to people they think don't deserve it. They will persist in this attitude even while worshipping and quoting a man who explicitly commands them to help even the least deserving (and set them plenty of examples to follow in that regard). 2) They are selfish with their money and will only use it for immediate reward (taxes!  ). At least when they're directly helping their immediate neighbors, they get the warm fuzzy feelings you mentioned plus the bragging rights and status in the community to go with it. There's no immediate reward for paying taxes; understanding the benefits of paying taxes requires some degree of abstract and long-term thinking - not that this should be difficult, but apparently it is. (ie. If we don't properly fund mental health programs, the result will be an increase in homelessness and related issues that will end up costing us 3x as much. gently caress you Regan!)3) They think "The Government" is an entity that exists almost solely to waste their money, because the free market can always do better. For example, the US Postal Service is somehow a model of inefficiency that could easily be replaced by profitable private enterprises (this is of course ignoring the fact that postal service is universal - including delivery to all sorts of rural places where mail delivery would never be "profitable" without a major price hike or added fees - and also ignoring the fact that profit is a terrible motive when it comes to necessary services [I would lump health care in here too]). I don't think the government having an actively malevolent purpose was a fear of very many people until very recently (when it was taken over buy a guy from Kenya).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 20:29
|
|
|
I think what they mean is, essentially, government intervention encourages people to not take care of themselves, leading to irresponsible, immoral behavior. And since all these snowbound white people have been taking care of themselves, they learned to act maturely in the face of danger. So, basically, they're blaming a lot of the bad consequences of Katrina on the victims. If only they hadn't relied so much on the government, they would've learned to swim!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 20:30
|
|
|
Samurai Goat posted:I think what they mean is, essentially, government intervention encourages people to not take care of themselves, leading to irresponsible, immoral behavior. And since all these snowbound white people have been taking care of themselves, they learned to act maturely in the face of danger. This is true too. Also, white people don't loot! It's not hard to help others when you yourself are still fairly secure. When all the snow in photos from that (fake) email melted, I doubt entire neighborhoods were faced with this: 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
Real Americans would've just burned that wood in a giant bonfire while circling around it singing Lee Greenwood.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 20:57
|
|
|
Samurai Goat posted:I think what they mean is, essentially, government intervention encourages people to not take care of themselves, leading to irresponsible, immoral behavior. And since all these snowbound white people have been taking care of themselves, they learned to act maturely in the face of danger. Basically thats what I meant yeah. People want charity to be optional and voluntary with government out of it. The irony is that these people will never volunteer their time unless compelled to.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 21:14
|
|
|
This whole thing is moronic too because the FEMA did respond faster to the flooding and has sent a bunch of money already.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 21:46
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Basically thats what I meant yeah. People want charity to be optional and voluntary with government out of it. The irony is that these people will never volunteer their time unless compelled to. I forgot to include it, but the email with the fake blizzard was titled: JUST DO IT YOURSELF! -THE AMERICAN WAY!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 21:50
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:This is true too. Also, white people don't loot! I still hate using this as an example of...well, anything, since it just picks two photo captions out of thousands taken during Katrina and both photographers think the verbs used were accurate. Obviously, it works as an easily digestible example of larger issues, but it always made me uncomfortable since it doesn't appear that anyone involved with the captioning or photography did anything wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 21:58
|
|
|
OrangeKing posted:I still hate using this as an example of...well, anything, since it just picks two photo captions out of thousands taken during Katrina and both photographers think the verbs used were accurate. Obviously, it works as an easily digestible example of larger issues, but it always made me uncomfortable since it doesn't appear that anyone involved with the captioning or photography did anything wrong. "They're just so poor... and so black..." I agree with you in principle, but a lot of nonchalant racism came out during Katrina.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2010 23:59
|
|
|
OrangeKing posted:I still hate using this as an example of...well, anything, since it just picks two photo captions out of thousands taken during Katrina and both photographers think the verbs used were accurate. Obviously, it works as an easily digestible example of larger issues, but it always made me uncomfortable since it doesn't appear that anyone involved with the captioning or photography did anything wrong. Your town is filled to the boobies with water, your house has been flushed with water all the way up through the attic, and you need supplies. I don't think it quite counts as looting when you walk off with a box of unsalable food items from a trashed and flooded grocery store (which was basically the argument of the photographer who used the word "finding"). Though I'll acknowledge the words may be technically accurate, merely because the people in the second picture waited for the goods to float out of the grocery store on their own before walking away with them. In any case, I wouldn't argue there was no (true) looting at all. Just that much of it was people looking for food that would have been garbage anyway. You had the coastal areas of at least three states totally ravaged, with up to 16 loving feet of water washing through entire cities (not to mention the hurricane winds themselves). The people stuck there had literally nowhere to go, because everywhere was royally hosed. To compare this with a snowstorm where once the situation improves to the point where people can even go anywhere to get any hypothetical looting done the emergency is already over is just absurd.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 01:47
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Basically thats what I meant yeah. People want charity to be optional and voluntary with government out of it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 06:22
|
|
|
ElectricMayhemBand posted:There's something about this that's always confused me. People get tax credits for donating to charity, right? So if taxes were lower, wouldn't there be less incentive to donate to charities as an offset for taxes, in which case lower taxes=less charitable giving and charities are less able to meet the needs of the people? Well to be honest this is a crappy reason for high taxes because that's not why we have them. We could afford to lower them in a lot of places if the money was spent better (I know this sounds like a Republican talking point but I'm talking about cutting the bloated military, things like that). You could argue you could reach the same conclusion if people had to spend less on taxes and had a more disposable income. But regardless they live in this sort of fantasy world where the charitable are like angels. Divine beings beyond our sort, worthy of reverence, but "normal folks" couldn't hope to do. The government FORCING people to do it is considered tyranny. Simply put they revere those that are willing to sacrifice their time or money but don't want to do it themselves. They assume theres always going to be someone willing to do it for free, just it's not gonna be them. RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 07:00 on May 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 06:56
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:We need to send this out to all the crazies: I don't blame you for missing/forgetting it, I'm just in somewhat-terrified awe that this megathread of copy-pasted idiocy has been going for 45 pages. 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 20:41
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:http://www.snopes.com/katrina/soapbox/snowfall.asp LOL the best part is of COURSE they declared a disaster, called FEMA and the National Guard what the hell is these people's problem? That's what amazes me about letters like this. They don't really care about day-to-day, actual governing. They loathe even the most basic, libertarian-acknowledged functions of government, just because it's got some association in their mind to black people.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Your town is filled to the boobies with water, your house has been flushed with water all the way up through the attic, and you need supplies. I don't think it quite counts as looting when you walk off with a box of unsalable food items from a trashed and flooded grocery store (which was basically the argument of the photographer who used the word "finding"). Though I'll acknowledge the words may be technically accurate, merely because the people in the second picture waited for the goods to float out of the grocery store on their own before walking away with them. You also had people during Katrina take tvs out of stores whose windows were broken. Also there were those who stole stuff from hotels like the brass railings in the aftermath. I don't mind people taken food from stores nor did a lot of the store owners. What the store owners objected to was the tossing stuff on the floors and breaking stuff that didn't need to be broken.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2010 20:14
|
|
|
ElectricMayhemBand posted:There's something about this that's always confused me. People get tax credits for donating to charity, right? So if taxes were lower, wouldn't there be less incentive to donate to charities as an offset for taxes, in which case lower taxes=less charitable giving and charities are less able to meet the needs of the people? There has been a few studies that show lowering taxes on the rich harms charitable giving since it's actually poor people that give the most percentage of their income to charity. Why should a rich person get a larger tax deducation over a poor person when the rich person can afford to give to charity?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2010 20:17
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:3) They think "The Government" is an entity that exists almost solely to waste their money, because the free market can always do better. For example, the US Postal Service is somehow a model of inefficiency that could easily be replaced by profitable private enterprises (this is of course ignoring the fact that postal service is universal - including delivery to all sorts of rural places where mail delivery would never be "profitable" without a major price hike or added fees - and also ignoring the fact that profit is a terrible motive when it comes to necessary services [I would lump health care in here too]). Guess what, the postal service is routinely profitable, and has been for some time, all while having the mission to deliver anywhere for the same rate and being self-sufficient. Anyone pointing to the post office as a model of governmental inefficiency is full of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2010 21:16
|
|
|
ThePeteEffect posted:Guess what, the postal service is routinely profitable, and has been for some time, all while having the mission to deliver anywhere for the same rate and being self-sufficient. Anyone pointing to the post office as a model of governmental inefficiency is full of poo poo. Independent of your other points, right now, it isn't.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2010 21:53
|
|
|
Valerius posted:Independent of your other points, right now, it isn't. Doesn't mean it couldn't become profitable again. They had a bad run of execs and guess what the post office became more privatervited in other words it's not as goverment run as it used to be. If you trace the privativation influence on the post office when the post office became less profitable it's when the goverment left control to private interests. Much like Walter Reed it's when private enterprise takes over that the goverment entity goes to the crap heap. Like privatitizing the military jacked up costs so much instead of a dollar per a bag of laundry the military was spending a few grand per laundry bag since Halliburton was having civilians doing the job instead of the marines doing it themselves. notcreativeenough fucked around with this message at 03:41 on May 13, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 03:38
|
|
|
Valerius posted:Independent of your other points, right now, it isn't. But they are paying their own way all while working under absurd restrictions such as forced Saturday delivery. I can send a letter to rural Alaska (where many places are only accessible by plane or boat) for the same price as sending one across town. It's kind of amazing when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 19:07
|
|
|
quote:-----You know me, and probably know that I do not believe in global warming. I respect everybody's views, but this is just another example of how, although noble, insignificant man's efforts are compared to nature itself. Remember Mt. Saint Helens. Another example of just how much carbon the earth can really absorb. For you "believers" this may be a little harsh, but I didn't write it, but I do find it very interesting!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 21:43
|
|
|
Hey a volcano causes climate change so why should I have to bother? Ain't getting any better! *Buys SUV*
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 21:48
|
|
|
quote:I respect everybody's views Hrmmm, indeed.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 23:13
|
|
|
I missed service today at the Climate Change Church. Maybe I'll get my salvation if I go to the Tabernacle of the Lower Carbon Emission.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 23:54
|
|
|
I'm not sure where the writer of that email even got his "numbers" from. (other than his rear end I mean) Mankind outproduces volcanoes by a large margin.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 23:57
|
|
|
Deuce posted:I'm not sure where the writer of that email even got his "numbers" from. (other than his rear end I mean) First time I ever heard that myth was from Reagan: Ronald Reagan posted:
Heard it from all kinds of conservative dicks since then too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 23:58
|
|
|
Putting a brick in your toilet reservoir is intended to reduce carbon emissions, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 00:01
|
|
|
a handful of dust posted:First time I ever heard that myth was from Reagan:
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 00:04
|
|
|
It's more like "Well our company is bleeding money because we give CEOs private jets and free vacations but it's bleeding MORE money because of our competion's superior marketing so why stop giving CEOs bonuses? We're bleeding money either way."
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 00:13
|
|
|
The uppermost estimates for Eyjafjoell's eruption is supposed to be about 300,000 tons per day, with a baseline estimate of 150,000 tons/day; this would be 2.1 million tons in the first week. There is no single "extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions," of course, but we can refer to the U.N.'s record of various pledges of CO2 reduction. The U.S., for example, pledged a reduction of 17% from 2005 levels by 2020; with the 2005 emissions of 5.878 billion tons of CO2 yearly, that would equate to a reduction of 999,260,000 tons/year. This is roughly 475 times the amount emitted by Eyjafjoell "in its first week," or 9.15 times the amount it would emit in a year if it continued erupting forever at the uppermost estimate levels. So, just as we would expect, the guy is indeed full of poo poo. edit: Whoops, missed a power of ten. Fixed now. Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 00:38 on May 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 00:33
|
|
|
In addition, the logic there seems to be equivalent to, hey, this kid already fell down, skinned his knees, and broke his arm - why shouldn't I keep kicking him in the head?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 02:53
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:In addition, the logic there seems to be equivalent to, hey, this kid already fell down, skinned his knees, and broke his arm - why shouldn't I keep kicking him in the head? His argument is wrong because his facts are wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 04:53
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:That doesn't really follow. If it were true that human contributions to atmospheric CO2 levels were negligible, then it's true that there would be very little purpose to trying to cut back on our own emissions. Except that's not what he argued. He argued that environmentalists' attempts at reducing emissions were a drop in the bucket. The logic that "it's already being damaged by X, but it'll heal" is hardly an excuse not to limit further damage as much as possible. Strudel Man posted:His argument is wrong because his facts are wrong. Obviously. I was merely pointing out it he's an idiot on multiple levels.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 05:44
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Except that's not what he argued. He argued that environmentalists' attempts at reducing emissions were a drop in the bucket. The logic that "it's already being damaged by X, but it'll heal" is hardly an excuse not to limit further damage as much as possible.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 05:54
|
|
|
quote:Subject: Germany 1938
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 07:13
|
|
|
burritonegro posted:Volcanos Just mail them back this :  (They had a bit of trouble with this one, in the end here's the data)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 10:52
|
|
|
quote:Got Documents?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 14:35
|
|
|
Bank account numbers - Not Released E-mail password - Not released Penis size - Not released
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 21:44 |
|
yatagan posted:EVERYTHING IS NAZI GERMANY! EVERYTHING. THERE IS LITERALLY NOTHING THAT ISN'T LIKE NAZI GERMANY.
|
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 18:23
|
|
