|
If you don't live and work like an 18th century Jesuit you don't deserve to live in this glorious new America.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 09:53 |
|
|
Abner Cadaver II posted:If you don't live and work like an 18th century Jesuit you don't deserve to live in this glorious new America. Heil Jesus! On a serious note. Anyone who lives in a world where marijuana and alcohol are terrible things one should never partake in must live in a really scary world right now. There's a reason Bernie is able to say that he is for legalizing marijuana. Part of that is because when millennials were growing up they got things like DARE that purported that if you smoked a joint you'd turn into the devil, cough out your heart, have brain cancer and murder your parents. With a little sideline of how terrible those black people who do all those nasty things are. Turns out all that happens when you smoke a joint is you get high for a little bit and then you aren't high anymore and you can function like a normal human being the rest of the time and black people are actually just like the rest of us. Doorknob Slobber has issued a correction as of 21:31 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:Uh, I'm a good student because I spend a lot of time doing schoolwork. Having to work in addition to that in order to pay my way through college means either my schoolwork would suffer or I wouldn't have any time to relax/spend with friends. How about a compromise: Free community college and heavily subsidized undergraduate for individuals willing to undergo regular and random drug screenings?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How about a compromise: Free community college and heavily subsidized undergraduate for individuals willing to undergo regular and random drug screenings? Out of grim curiosity what do you think is so wrong with doing drugs for fun? I tend to agree that abusing substances is bad, but not all use as abuse. The majority of people that hold that opinion tend to be former addicts/alcoholics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:The "time spent drinking and getting high" is usually the same time I spend socializing with friends. Removing alcohol/weed from that equation won't make me any more productive, because I'm already doing something else (hanging out with friends instead of working/doing schoolwork). I smoke because it's bad, it's really simple.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
I'll play the extremist nut job in this scene: Doing drugs is hella rad and if I can't replace my blood with heroin by 2017 I'm gonna vote Trump for every election in the country.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How about a compromise: Free community college and heavily subsidized undergraduate for individuals willing to undergo regular and random drug screenings? I wouldn't have figured you for anti-drug, but I guess I'm not too surprised that you have another horrible opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
taqueso posted:I wouldn't have figured you for anti-drug, but I guess I'm not too surprised that you have another horrible opinion. You hadn't realized that he's an authoritarian by now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Reason posted:Out of grim curiosity what do you think is so wrong with doing drugs for fun? I tend to agree that abusing substances is bad, but not all use as abuse. The majority of people that hold that opinion tend to be former addicts/alcoholics. Nothing. What I think is wrong is when individuals, after using public funds to purchase recreational substances during their education, feel angry that they have to pay those funds back. taqueso posted:I wouldn't have figured you for anti-drug, but I guess I'm not too surprised that you have another horrible opinion. I'm not anti-drug in the context you're thinking; I'm anti-using public funds for the purchase of drugs and then feeling bitter that you have to pay that money back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Nothing. So could the government pay for college by instead of sending an individual a check for $3000 each quarter, just paying an individuals bill and you would be fine with no drug tests? What about if a person is receiving free college tuition but also working?How would you separate the money they earned by not being lazy slobs and working a job from the public money received to attend college? I don't even think thats how "free college" would work. I think it would just be you take classes and don't have to pay for them the end. Where is the public money being used for drugs in that scenario? I'm just not seeing a situation in which someone is getting public money to pay for college and then instead using it on drugs. When I was in college the way the federal aid money worked was that it would be given directly to the university/college and then if there was any left over it would be sent into your bank account. If you had money left over from the federal aid you have to be some kind of lucky alien because most of the time federal aid now won't cover a full credit course as it is. I don't see a system in which that money would ever be directly sent to the student if any money even exchanged hands at all. Doorknob Slobber has issued a correction as of 22:21 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Do countries offering free college also offer free room and board to students? That's worth researching.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm not anti-drug in the context you're thinking; I'm anti-using public funds for the purchase of drugs and then feeling bitter that you have to pay that money back. Yeah, me too. You shouldn't have to pay back the money, so no need to feel bitter. I think the government should provide all drugs on-demand, for free, to all citizens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/695693783334330369
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
People tuned in to see MOM. Now that hes gone, why even bother? Plus the R debates are much more entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
MOM's a draw, brother
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
There would appear to be a correlation between the amount of time which is devoted to Sanders during a debate and lower debate viewership.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Nothing real surprising. If you already know who you're rooting for, which I think is most Democrats.there's really no reason to tune in because you pretty much know what you're going to get. Republican debates only getting ratings because they're a complete clown show and are hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Remember when someone was just reading a webpage on the live MSNBC stream? Good times.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:There would appear to be a correlation between the amount of time which is devoted to Sanders during a debate and lower debate viewership. Wouldnt you have to... you know... watch the debate to gauge Sanders' air time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Do countries offering free college also offer free room and board to students? Tuition at public universities in Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, and Austria is nearly free (around 1,000-1,800eu), with housing around 200-700EU ($223-$781) a month, depending on region. Finland is all is free, I think, as is Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Tuition in Germany and France is negligible, but housing is roughly the same as the rest of the EU. At US flagship public schools, housing varies from $6,000-$15,500, as does in state tuition from $9,000-$30,000 to $5,000-$17,000 for a secondary or tertiary campus. Out of state students should expect to pay the same for housing but about $30,000 for tuition. At a private school, tuition is $50,000-$60,000, $20,000+ of which is housing. Assuming a 10 month academic year, in Europe housing is $2,230-$7,810 on top of little else. The UKs schools have become dramatically more expensive on account of austerity, but as it is the maximum tuition a "uni" can charge is £9,000 ($13,000), though many are still far less. Still, it is not so bad compared to the US: the most expensive elite urban university in the UK that I can think of is the Univeristy College of London, which is around £15,000 ($21,000) per year which includes £6,000 for housing; frankly, for London, that's nothing and the entire country is "in state". By comparison, arguably the best public university in the US, UC Berkeley, is in total $28,000 per year. Fear not, Oxford, Cambridge are less expensive by thousands of pounds due to cheaper housing. Think about that: total costs study at Harvard (they do give away lots of money) is $60,000 a year; Oxford likely $18,500. Further, student loan terms in the UK are more generous than in the US in most ways. Also important to highlight is that if you are not a citizen of a state with a good public system (e.g. CA, VA, MI, NC, SC) you will pay out the nose to get that "public ivy" experience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 09:53 |
|
|
Reason posted:On a serious note. Anyone who lives in a world where marijuana and alcohol are terrible things one should never partake in must live in a really scary world right now. I can speak of behalf of those people when I say: So long as people don't go on airplanes smelling so strongly of weed that I gag and wish I could change my seat, I'm fine. It's bad enough dealing with that poo poo on the bus in areas where weed might as well already be legal, but assigned seating makes it worse. Other than that, I don't give a poo poo what you're doing out of my sight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:12
|
|
