Got a crazy forwarded political email from your family? Post them here.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Got a crazy forwarded political email from your family? Post them here.

«‹›7 »

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Facebook status making the rounds:

quote:

Dear Mr. President, I hear you would like to freeze US military pay rates, starting next year. Would you also consider cutting your own pay to save much more money for our country? While you're at it, let's cut down each congressman's pay too. If the people who risk their lives don't get an increase in pay, why would we continue raising pay for those who take no risks and reap the benefits? Repost if you agree

This is in reference to the deficit commission draft report released by two of it's members, one D and one R.

# ¿ Nov 23, 2010 18:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:31

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

MrNemo posted:

So if you guys want to have fun you can respond to those guys that if Lenin thought it was a good idea they must be on to something.

Got a link for that? It don't disbelieve you, but I like sources.

# ¿ Nov 23, 2010 19:07

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

It's not that I was not aware of the idea that government solidarity with labor wages was a socialist idea, it's that I wanted to actually see more about it.

Thanks for the link.

# ¿ Nov 23, 2010 20:00

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

XyloJW posted:

God bless Snopes. http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/carlin.asp I know Carlin can be pretty "gently caress you" towards any position but still. "Can I get an AMEN to that?"

I didn't need to read Snopes to know that was false. Anyone who knows the slightest bit about Carlin would know that if you could pick any word to describe his politics, "conservative" would not be it.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2011 18:33

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Blarghalt posted:

Is a straight-up lie.

Yep

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Mar 2, 2011 02:19

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

gowb posted:

There are funny conservatives. Drew Carey, for one. Dennis Miller. Rush Limbaugh was pretty funny back in the day, when he was less bitter and angry. There's not nearly as many funny conservatives, for sure, but they are there. I do agree that most blatantly political conservative humor tends to fall flat, but the same thing applies to blatantly liberal humor as well. It's hard to be funny with an agenda.

I wouldn't count Dennis Miller as "funny", but whatever makes you laugh I guess.

I'd agree, there's a lot of funny conservatives, but there's not a lot of people that can make conservatism funny.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2011 21:16

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

So the whole Bin Laden thing has alerted me to the fact that one of my high school friends is a truther.

I haven't argued that dumb crap in a long time, so I'm not as prepared to shut him down quickly. Is there any catch-all site like talk-origins for that stuff?

# ¿ May 3, 2011 01:39

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

crime fighting hog posted:

Oh god:

Did I respond correctly?

Given the same one, I pointed out that the House GOP were the ones pushing for a shutdown, and that Obama gave the op the go-ahead months before the negotiations on the budget broke down.

# ¿ May 3, 2011 18:58

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Jastiger posted:

"Do you really think its better for our economy for people to be on unemployment than simply employed"

I said "Yeah, I'd rather have a doctor be a doctor than take an unskilled job. We need doctors"

**Libertarian friend has gone offline**

"He's still a doctor and can go back to being one at any time."

# ¿ May 5, 2011 23:03

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

I've had the attached image posted on my facebook and I'm busy trolling the people who "liked" it. I pointed out that returning veterans have a hugely high unemployment rate(30%) and why don't these lazy fucks stop assuming the government will support them with handouts like they already got, and suck it up and take some jobs they don't like.

It's fascinating watching the people who use the "47% of people don't pay taxes" stat tell me I'm cherry picking, and about how they all the veterans they know are trying to find jobs very hard after already implying that OWS protesters are not trying to get jobs or not taking lovely ones. I've become more and more blatant about using their arguments against them and they're not getting it, even though I'm saying things I never would.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 20:36

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

ratbert90 posted:

Ask them what freedoms are they protecting?

I did, and also how they're being threatened. No response.

But dude works for a defense contractor, I realize that this tactic isn't going to get anywhere with him.

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 21:01

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

I understand I'm not going to change any minds. It's somewhat amazing to me how blatantly I can be parroting their arguments and manipulating them into making the same points I did, and still not have them become self-aware.

It's more about a side than a discussion.

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 21:37

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Sarion posted:

That particular rule is actually a religious thing, specifically to prevent the unintentional worship of other gods in the region, whose followers would boil a calf or goat in its mother's milk as a form of sacrifice. We'd like to think it had to do with hygiene, but you're really over thinking it. It's very unlikely they'd ever put two and two together. Botulism isn't all that common, and when it happens symptoms can occur anywhere from a few hours to a day and a half later. So most of the time people eat it, and nothing happens. And sometimes when they eat it they get sick. And sometimes they eat it, have several other meals and then get sick.

That's something I didn't know, is there some additional info on this?

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 22:48

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Oh I didn't doubt you, I just like to see other info so I don't take something on someone's word only.

It makes senses, as some cultures don't even connect sex with reproduction, let alone something that's less obvious like botulism from expired seafood.

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 23:20

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Helicon One posted:

"Thanks for protecting my freedom to occupy Wall Street!"

Holy poo poo, this is so much better than what I did.

# ¿ Nov 28, 2011 23:54

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Idiot facebook status time:

quote:

Suppose Robinson Crusoe is tired of trying to scoop up fish with his hands and figures out how to turn a tree branch into a spear, increasing his daily catch tenfold. Can Friday, who never thought to make a spear, properly complain that Crusoe has received an �unfair distribution� of fish?

# ¿ Nov 30, 2011 18:24

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Glitterbomber posted:

Yea let's be super clear here, Friday has a poo poo ton of grievances to air against him, the least of which being 'hey dick give me some fish'.

Was Friday a literal slave in the book, or more of a sycophantic 'noble savage'?

I've never read it, so I'm going to have to bullshit my through that posting. Though I don't think he ever has either.

Also yeah I understand that Crusoe was a slaver prior to the island.

# ¿ Nov 30, 2011 19:04

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Moses was a political dissident and probably guilty of treason.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2011 21:15

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Riptor posted:

German, Eastern European, African/Native American, Native American

What is more American than exploiting people and stealing their culture?

# ¿ Jan 30, 2012 23:42

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Pretentious Turtle posted:

-Ronald Reagan

I poo poo you not, mac and cheese was known as "President Reagan" in my house growing up. My parents heard he loved it and welp.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 00:30

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

katlington posted:

Hey that reminds me, do any of you people "lucky" enough to get these wonderful emails from friends & relatives ever call them on their poo poo? As in actually say to them, "This is not true. This is a lie. You are telling lies. You are a liar." What's the response?

You stop getting those emails, because they stop contacting you.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 00:51

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Do I need to bust out the checklist?

# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 02:03

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Cynnik posted:

To solve the homeless problem today, the realistic solution isn't to say that we should close the soup kitchens because they clearly aren't solving anything and start building housing today. Sure, the longterm outlook on a plan like that is pretty good, but in the mean time, people are starving to death.

Voting 3rd party in a swing state is a bad idea, especially if your goal is to get a 'real progressive' in office.

If Romney wins the election, you've closed the soup kitchens. Personhood legislation. Rollback of civil rights. The list goes on and on, but the most important thing to consider is the Supreme Court, but you know this.

What you may not have considered is what would happen to everyone to the left of the extreme right. You would have a regressive president in office, and probably a regressive house, senate, and supreme court. Conservatives have no problem ramming through terrible legislation. Maybe even starting a war or two. Then everyone from the left of the extreme right would come together and say 'anyone but this one', and you would end up with a centrist, pragmatic, corporatist, like Barack Obama.

What if Obama wins in 2012. Now the true left can argue from a position of strength. There will be a primary. Sure, Russ Feingold might not get the nomination, but you can be assured that true left ideals will come up in the debates.

Is this an email forward? I am legitimately unclear.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 20:19

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2012/09/obamacare-explained-in-one-long-sentence-video-2478968.html

This one popped up on my Facebook. Bonus points for complaining about Obamacare in front of a Romney audience.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2012 19:28

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

quote:

Huh...who'd a thunk my great benefits I had for 7 years would have to be reduced because of Obamacare. My outpatient surgery coverage was reduced to cover only 90% because of the financial strain prexisting conditions and the elimination of a lifetime maximum. So now I have actually have less coverage as a result. So now 10% of [my child's] tonsilectomy is not covered. I'm looking into changing her citizenship to get it covered 100%. Annnnd go...quick, tell me how it's better!

This is from an extremely conservative friend who has been making GBS threads on the socialist Obamacare and having to pay for other peoples healthcare since it was passed.

The sad part about this is he's really just getting screwed by his job, which is cutting his benefits and telling him it's Obamacare's fault.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2012 23:48

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Hiring tests like Unicru has, have pretty much no correlation with worker performance. They're just a gateway to cut down on applicants.

# ¿ Sep 15, 2012 01:03

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

This old chestnut is making it around on my facebook:

quote:

Had to share this--- we all like beer...
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. �Since you are all such good customers,� he said, �I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.� Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage.

They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

�I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,� declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, �but he got $10!�
�Yeah, that's right,� exclaimed the fifth man. �I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!�
�That's true!� shouted the seventh man. �Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!�
�Wait a minute,� yelled the first four men in unison, �we didn't get anything at all. This new system exploits the poor!�

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists, and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics

# ¿ Oct 23, 2012 20:53

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Ghost of Reagan Past posted:

If that was actually written by a PhD in economics he should have his PhD revoked.

If you google him literally the first thing in his bio is "I did not write that crap".

# ¿ Oct 23, 2012 21:48

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Absurd Alhazred posted:

Note the bolded caveat, though:

Presumably he's a lazy dude who doesn't want to waste time going back and forth with people.

# ¿ Oct 23, 2012 21:58

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Mo_Steel posted:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

All of them pay the same amount because sales tax isn't progressively scaled and since they're buying something here income tax means gently caress all. Literal children can comprehend this, and you cannot. You're a loving embarrassment to your friends and colleagues and you would be ashamed at how idiotically gullible you are if you had half the sense of a 12 year old. Grow the gently caress up.

THE END

-----

To clarify, I really really hate that stupid lovely example a lot. God it's dumb.

He's in Arizona, his friends and colleagues aren't ashamed, they're highfiving him and Like-ing the post.

# ¿ Oct 23, 2012 23:14

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

nsaP posted:

What about chips that just keep your medical history? I'd volunteer for that.

Or, you know, like an ID card such as many sane countries have.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2012 01:06

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

bobkatt013 posted:

Could he just be wearing it so he could hear the moderator?

He isn't wearing anything. Those pictures make it clear that the person who made it is delusional, there's nothing there.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2012 19:37

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Sarion posted:

It sounds like the kind of thing that got California into it's mess. You can pass laws to create all kinds of government services, but any taxes have to go through referendum. As a result, raising taxes in California is nearly impossible, unless I'm completely off base about how it works.

Prop 13: Capped the property tax and required a 2/3 majority in the state legislature to raise taxes.

You can pass all sort of poo poo (we actually passed single-payer until it got vetoed by Arnold), but you can't fund it. California was literally the proving ground for Norquist's Starve The Beast ideology. Now Cali taxes are a bizarre travesty where sales tax is high, property tax is low, and income tax is somewhere in the middle. That's why our budget swings from year to year so drastically.

# ¿ Oct 25, 2012 02:14

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Sarion posted:

Not surprising. I like how he assumes that Toyota's cars don't include worker benefit costs. I know Toyota and Honda avoid union workers, but workers at Toyota plants still get paid comparable wages, and similar benefits (if not so generous).

Before the restructuring, GM was still costing, on average, $1000 more for one it's popular models versus a similar Toyota, even if you zero'd out all it's labor costs.

Toyota workers have always used GM union wages as a benchmark, but you'll often see the numbers compared like "30ish for Toyota and 70ish for GM" from an old article that was floating around where they added up all the costs for worker pay, benefits, and legacy benefits for workers who were not even currently employed by GM while just using straight pay at Toyota.

Not to mention that Toyota and the other Japanese companies are fully unionized in their home countries.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2012 01:50

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Got this from a guy on facebook making the tortured argument that the welfare state gives an incentive for minorities to have single parent households and that is why blacks are disproportionately imprisoned.

quote:

"The connection between family breakdown and child poverty is well established. In a 1991 American Sociological Review article, David J. Eggebeen and Daniel T. Lichter estimated that if black family composition had remained constant from 1960 to 1988, the black child poverty rate in 1988 would have been 28.4 percent instead of 45.6 percent."

"The black out-of-wedlock birth rate ballooned from less than 25 percent in the early 1960s to 49 percent in 1975 and to 70 percent in 1995." 2010 = 77%

"In the absence of widening racial differences in family structure(baby mama's), the 1960-1988 period would have brought substantial convergence in racial differences in official, deep, and relative child poverty."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/923fdspn.asp
Family Ties
https://www.weeklystandard.com

# ¿ Dec 10, 2012 22:48

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

This one seems to be circulating currently on Facebook:

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/14ot1r/what_societal_pressures_are_there_on_men_to_man_up/c7f1p04

It's a short essay from a guy who's starting to see the ways that patriarchy is destructive to men(as well as women), but who's response to this is to feel persecuted and push for MRA.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2012 19:45

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

Zeitgueist posted:

This one seems to be circulating currently on Facebook:

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/14ot1r/what_societal_pressures_are_there_on_men_to_man_up/c7f1p04

It's a short essay from a guy who's starting to see the ways that patriarchy is destructive to men(as well as women), but who's response to this is to feel persecuted and push for MRA.

So I said that partiarchy oppresses both sexes, the guy posting this says women have the advantage most of the time in society. I asked for examples and got:

quote:

Women have the upper hand in nearly all legal situations. http://www.terry.uga.edu/%7Emustard/sentencing.pdf

Men are more likely to be victims of violent crime. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/vsxtab.cfm

Domestic violence is equally committed between men and women, but men for the most part are the ones arrested. http://www.csulb.edu/%7Emfiebert/assault.htm

Male batterers are almost always prosecuted while female batterers see little to no criminal action against them. http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf

Males are substantially more likely to commit suicide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_and_suicide

The male incarceration rate is roughly 15 times the female incarceration rate.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png

Boys and men are doing worse in nearly all aspects of education. http://www.boysproject.net/statistics.html

Men falsely accused of rape are ruined publicly. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-01/duke-lacrosse-players-suit-over-false-rape-claim-may-proceed-judge-says.html

A boy that is a victim of rape can be forced to pay child support. http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/legally-obscene/

A women can name any father she wants. http://reason.com/archives/2004/02/01/injustice-by-default

A man who wishes to father his own child can have his child adopted against his will. http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2011/09/09/again-utah-forces-adoption-on-fit-fathers-child/

67% of homeless individuals are male. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/who.html

Female business owners get free government funding for no reason. http://reason.com/archives/2004/07/01/confessions-of-a-woman-owned-b

Recent Federal directives instruct universities to convict men of rape if the chances of them committing rape is greater than 50.00001% http://falserapearchives.blogspot.ca/2011/09/writings-demonstrating-error-and.html

Selective Service

Men have no reproductive rights. http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/fathers/male-reproductive-rights/

Women have the right to abort a pregnancy but men have no right to abort financially. They are forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the next 20 years of a child's life. http://www.blogher.com/frame.php?url=http://www.theroot.com/views/what-if-i-dont-want-be-daddy?page=0,0

Women are awarded custody of a child 68%-88% of the time. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-hughes/are-custody-decisions-bia_b_870709.html

As a preemptive strike...don't bring up women making less money than men. It's not statistically true.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2012 20:32

Zeitgueist: Aug 8, 2003; by Ralp

DarkHorse posted:

And then when they bring up their bullshit hypocrisy point I have to point out that W.Bush and Romney had gun control stances practically indistinguishable from Obama. In fact, the only legislation Obama has signed regarding guns has been to expand them to federal parks and Amtrak!

BUT NO, OBAMA IS JUST SO MUCH WORSE ABOUT GUNS