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.

«‹›3 »

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

faustcf posted:

My mom's family is always sending her these emails for some reason. I'm not even sure how to take this one.

Don't you get it, HE'S BLACK and Mount Rushmore (an everyone on it) is white.

# ¿ Aug 21, 2009 17:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 23, 2024 13:02

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Keshik posted:

12. What if I told you Barack Obama was black?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

WAKE UP AMERICA

fixed the end.

Edit:

I made the mistake of responding to a few email forwards my dad sent me with thought out rebuttals. I am now not speaking with my father. I am debating on putting the exchange up here for amusement, but it is really just sad.

Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Sep 8, 2009

# ¿ Sep 8, 2009 20:33

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Casca posted:

Got a couple of them here that my uncle sent a couple days ago. The first paragraph is his comments. I never knew he was this bad.

I like how he thinks all the great things he mentions will still be intact after his little revolution. The ignorance is astounding.

# ¿ Sep 10, 2009 23:26

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

That... doesn't actually sound so bad. Was it supposed to?

# ¿ Oct 13, 2009 00:06

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

oxbrain posted:

they're starting with CA because the gun laws make it the easiest state to control.

I am not sure this makes sense. California has quite a lot of people compared to other states. Wouldn't it then follow that California has more gun owners than other states? There is the physical size of California compared to other states, too.

# ¿ Dec 23, 2009 01:42

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Toad on a Hat posted:

You'd think the CDC would control the populace with a more horrific and harder to treat disease, like AIDS, cancer, etc.

But no. They chose DIABETES!!!!!

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/47959/diabetus.jpg

It all makes sense.

# ¿ Jan 15, 2010 01:44

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

RagnarokAngel posted:

Witty!

Why yes, that sounds totally believable!

# ¿ Feb 1, 2010 18:02

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

the posted:

I don't understand the argument that people that aren't born in the US aren't subject to it's laws. What happened to all people are created equal and are equally protected under the law? It's astonishingly embarrassing that these people are proclaiming to protect American values, but their very first instinct is to betray the most fundamental part of the American judicial system. I wish I had the :psyduck:

image that is spewing out other :psyduck:

# ¿ Feb 8, 2010 22:11

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Anosmoman posted:

Well you should squeeze in a link to this article http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3264863 Nothing wrong with using waterboarding as a disciplinary tool on a 4 year old - it's just water and not cruel at all

I... I...

gently caress.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2010 22:34

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

ducttape posted:

Isn't the guy who has the line 'I do not like it Sam I am' the one who, in the end, realizes that he was entirely incorrect?

Yes, Sam was so blinded by the appearance of the green eggs and ham that he decided he didn't like it before he tried it. When he finally breaks down and tries it in the end it turns out he was actually just being incredibly stubborn and retarded. It's actually very apt because thats exactly how most republicans function. maybe Deep Hurting could make it into something funny. There is a joke buried somewhere in there, but I cant put it into words.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2010 23:10

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Zwabu posted:

The converse is how everything possible that is good is projected onto Reagan (and now Palin). He is Santa Claus

I know I am cutting your quote short, but there is an entire political theory based around santa clause that the GOP follows to to the letter. you should up on it because it actually explains why they act the way they do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jude_Wanniski

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/26-0

# ¿ Jun 25, 2010 00:40

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

PainterofCrap posted:

Watch the film Idiocracy. It looks less & less exaggerated, and is less funny, every year.

You're not joking. It is scary.

# ¿ Oct 4, 2010 16:25

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

zeroprime posted:

Some people actually think that, yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin#Siljan_Ring.2C_Sweden

to be fair, there are some legitimate hypothesis on bacteria in the crust creating hydrocarbons. No serious scientist is claiming that all, most, or even a large quantity of it was made via these processes.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2012 21:50

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

XyloJW posted:

I love Cosmos, and I know it's what everyone associates most with Sagan, but it's very dense. For anyone who got discouraged by Cosmos, I'd heartily recommend giving Demon-Haunted World a shot. It's much more focused and much more personal.

Oddly enough, Cosmos is getting a reboot in 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/arts/television/fox-plans-new-cosmos-with-seth-macfarlane-as-a-producer.html?_r=3&src=tp

# ¿ Jun 26, 2012 21:18

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Nenonen posted:

There are people who refuse to wear seatbelts just because it's government intervention

They do exist. My father was on one of them until he almost died in a DUI. now he wears it because it's the smart thing to do.

:unsmith:

Its such an apt metaphor for healthcare I don't know what to say

# ¿ Jul 6, 2012 00:49

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

ZappDash posted:

Welp.

This is (long) after I sent a Snopes link to the mass e-mail about Obama being snubbed from the royal wedding (as if it matters). So now a website whose sole mission is to debunk myths is deemed untruthful. Uh huh.

I also fail to see how Geroge Soros funding the website would matter if it was true, because Snopes was around well before Obama. The casual linkage made between Snopes, Obama, Kagan, and Soros is astounding. The levels of fabrication are now beyond reproach.

Also, at The Real Truth About Obama, Inc. represented by The Bopp Law Firm. That seriously can't be a thing.

I don't think they understand what a solicitor general is. I can't wait for the conservapedia edition of snopes to emerge.

# ¿ Jul 6, 2012 21:15

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Cowslips Warren posted:

So to back away from the Obama poo poo my mom's coworkers always send her (SECRET MUSLUM!), one of them sent her a video link about why women are ruining this world. Seriously. The fact this was linked to her from Upworthy makes me wonder how stupid these people are.

http://www.upworthy.com/wow-just-wow-anti-women-propaganda-at-its-finest?c=ufb1

If you contraceptive (verb), you are killing yourself and making men gay!

There's some serious :biotruths:

going on in that video. They think are making a completely sound and scientific argument as well. :barf:

# ¿ Oct 16, 2012 00:02

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

800peepee51doodoo posted:

Hahaha yes move to Eugene, that bastion of conservative values.

Also, it says he's near Nipomo which is San Luis Obispo county. And if Nipomo's not right-wing enough for him, well, good luck anywhere on the west coast I guess

I grew up in Nipomo, CA and it is backwater as gently caress. My fathers side of the family all lives there and they are mostly racist hicks. the younger generation has mostly left, and those that stayed are now full blown bigots that don't have an original thought in their head.

# ¿ Nov 8, 2012 22:44

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Herman Merman posted:

Improper, unnecessary capitalization of "scientific" terms is a great way to spot a person who's not exactly confident in his subject matter.

There's also the problem of being unable to prove a negative. How are you supposed to prove that it isnt made up, or that it didn't create energy...

I hate people.

edit: some good questions to show him he doesn't know anything:

1. ask him to define energy and to define power and then ask what makes them different.

2. ask him how the power generated from this device was used to do work.

3. ask him to demonstrate the concept by building a working model. or even a concept drawing.

Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Nov 28, 2012

# ¿ Nov 28, 2012 21:46

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

jmzero posted:

And if it did, would it generate enough to be worth building and running?

I can show you a whole selection of devices that draw "free" energy from the sun. Similarly, I am sure you could make a device that could draw usable power from the ionosphere (or whatever he said) - I mean, lightning exists, and there's probably all sorts of charge separations and what not you could theoretically exploit.

But if Tesla was anywhere close to viability, he would have stuck with the idea. There's a reason why history isn't full of super-duper lost technologies (though admittedly there are some): technologies that provide value tend to attract interest and spawn imitations and generally not get forgotten.

I agree with this, but the biggest counter example happens to be a pretty big one. Steam power was discovered in Roman times, and was never realized as a source of work. it was just a novelty. it wasn't until the 1700's that it was re-discovered as a way to do work.

Things are lost to history quite regularly, but I doubt that Tesla's tower should be included in that list.

# ¿ Nov 28, 2012 22:31

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Cakeequals posted:

I honestly have no idea where to even start with this.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/make_those_lazy_job_creators_pay_T37Nt3GwdcATnO7bGs3xnM

Like I get that the NY Post is awful, but this one full on insane strawman.

Don't you get it

quote:

Political satirist Frank J. Fleming

It's satire, DUH. :suicide:

# ¿ Nov 29, 2012 00:47

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

jmzero posted:

Regardless of content, it's just such horrible writing. He has no grasp of the form, and says nothing clever. It's not even up to the kind of sad "I'm Like the Onion" standard I see in small local papers.

Similarly, I was really dismayed when I read the "amazingly scathing" review of that Fieri restaurant a few days ago. I'd read the comments on it before I read the item itself, and was expecting some wit, or humor, or at least some anger. It was just kind of a bland, whiny dislike - and it's getting tossed around as a hilarious masterpiece.

I think big media outlets need to read some front page SomethingAwful - get a sense of what it might look like to make a point with comedy. The standard of writing, for anything but the driest factual articles, is pathetically low right now at publications you'd expect to be drawing from a good pool.

Conservative satire has always been terrible. They just don't get how it's done.

# ¿ Nov 29, 2012 01:22

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

I couldn't count the number of time's I've been told that the Democrats were the real racists, and the republicans totally were on board with CRA. These same people argue that the KKK was started by and is full of democrats.

There is no nuance in their minds to accurately reflect complicated historical events. Putting events in context has no value for them, as it requires a level of understanding that would demolish their world views. It is voluntary ignorance in its pure form.

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 22:48

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Aeka 2.0 posted:

I'm really starting to hate Facebook and the people on it. Everyone thinks they have nuggets of wisdom when they are repeating the same poo poo over and over, posting the same memes, and barfing out the talking points. Nobody has an original thought anymore and it it really showing since Friday. Holy poo poo.
"~*Share this if you agree, if not delete it and move on*~"
gently caress!

I think you can replace Facebook in that sentence with "places people congregate online." Reddit has this problem, Digg had it, Slashdot had it, MySpace had it, people just loving suck.

# ¿ Dec 17, 2012 22:37

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

CheesyDog posted:

Here's something I ended typing up in response to one "Post Armed Guards at Every School" comment threads I ended up involved with. These are some rough numbers, but I thought that goons might find it useful for arguing with their stupid Facebook friends:

Alright, I'm coming up with 138,925 public, private, and post-secondary schools in the United States. Assuming three guards to cover the full school day (buses start arriving around 6:30, you'll need at least two guards there during the day so that their is coverage during lunch breaks, bathroom breaks, etc., at least one guard during basketball and football games and other post-school activities), at the median security guard salary of $31,000 annually, plus the cost of benefits bringing the average cost per guard up to around $35,000, you're looking at $14,587,125,000 annually for security guards in each school.

Given that the median cost for a child's health insurance is around $940 a year, you could insure every one of the 7 million uninsured children in the United States twice for this amount of money. This would prevent 850 child deaths a year, compared with the around ~50 child deaths due to school shootings annually.

Given that it's children you're worried about and not your guns, I trust you'll support a universal healthcare program for every child under the age of 18? It will cost less than half the cost of hiring security guards for every school and save around 9 times more lives.

Citations:
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84
http://www.indeed.com/salary/Armed-Security-Officer.html
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/CRC/crc2011.pdf
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/data/incpovhlth/2011/highlights.html
http://healthland.time.com/2009/10/29/lack-of-insurance-factors-into-childrens-deaths/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#2010s

I love it, and I'll be using this as a response to anyone who brings it up to me. Thanks.

# ¿ Dec 20, 2012 01:51

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

DarkHorse posted:

It's probably a little more complex than that, because you have the inter-related effects of poverty, population demographics, etc. confounding everything. Really though it's because there are that many more people there - after all, those little blue dots in totum are more than 50% of the voters.
XKCD gets a lot of (justified) hate, but it's basically this: http://xkcd.com/1138/

I still don't understand why XKCD gets hate at all. Can someone explain it to me?

# ¿ Jan 22, 2013 23:46

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

Try out http://xkcd.com/7/ and see if you gain any insight?

Still not getting it. Why should I be outraged that someone drew a picture of a girl sleeping in their high school class? Are you saying his art is juvenile and thus not worth looking at? I have no idea how that picture was supposed to tell me anything. Someone please use words to explain it so I don't have to keep guessing why this is such a common thing among D&D.

I feel like I've missed something really obvious, or D&D is hating for no reason.

# ¿ Jan 23, 2013 00:31

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

The hopeless romantic stuff I don't mind. I can see why the " my science is holier than other sciences" schtick would turn people off though. It is a pretty minor offense when compared to many other web comics however.

Anyway, sorry for the derail. I figured there was more to it than I understood, but I couldn't figure it out on my own.

# ¿ Jan 23, 2013 01:06

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

No, the best response is to now like the onion piece entitled "http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-passionate-defender-of-what-he-imagines-c,2849/" and say, "look they wrote an article about you too! "

seiferguy posted:

People react so hilariously to images that the feel attacks their character. I remember when a guy posted the "THEY DIDN'T CHANGE FERTILIZER AFTER MCVEIGH BOMBED OKC" and I calmly responded to that claim (and only that claim) saying that they did, and provided the source. Then someone immediately responded "SO YOU MEAN THEY SHOULD TAKE OUR GUNS, RIGHT? THEY WANT OUR GUNS"

I don't know what causes people to live in constant fear of these things.

Years of being propagandized have conditioned some people into intellectual zombies. They can be totally awesome people in some regards, but as soon as you push that conditioned response button its full speed to crazy town.

Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Jan 23, 2013

# ¿ Jan 23, 2013 20:42

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

LeJackal posted:

You've never dealt with a "May Issue' state like California.

The New York system is a highly regressive system which makes it extremely difficult to legally possess a firearm in the home, a license for carry is nearly impossible to get without being wealthy or well connected. Schumer possesses the highest tier of carry licenses which is not afforded to the common man, in addition he surrounds himself with police escorts often - in short he has campaigned forcefully to abrogate the rights of the populace as a whole while using his position to exercise that right to the fullest.

Feinstein is in a similar situation.

Are you arguing that Schumer has a license to carry that cannot be achieved by others? Did you stop to consider that he has a pretty good reason to have that concealed carry license where others do not? It seems to me that you are trying to make an argument, but aren't actually doing so.

In my eyes, Schumer is proving that a citizen can be pro gun legislation and still own and carry a gun for protection. He is the living proof that gun legislation does not prevent those who wish to legally carry from doing so.

# ¿ Jan 24, 2013 00:09

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

800peepee51doodoo posted:

I'm from california. Lots of people I know have guns. They sell them in WalMart and pawn shops. It's unbelievably easy to get a gun in california. It's not even that hard to get a CCW permit judging from all the cracker rear end redneck contractors I know who carry because those shifty mexican day laborers might steal their tools or something. If California is your idea of an oppressive anti-gun police state, you're insane.

Born and raised in California, and I've never had a problem purchasing or owning a gun here. I have shotguns, handguns, rifles, and antiques. There are plenty of places to shoot them and at no point has any tried to take them away from me. I suspect they never will either. I've got no issue with an AWB or even handgun bans. I don't have a CCW and don't really ant one. I shoot mostly because I was born into that lifestyle and it never really left me. I can't discuss gun issues with my family without them going full retard.

Basically most people that own guns have no loving clue what a gun law looks like, what they actually do, or how they could be effective in preventing crime and gun related violence. They "know" in their guts without ever having to read any legislation that their rights are being taken away. They disagree with gun laws for the same reason they disagree with Obama on everything. Because they've been told to by their propaganda puppet masters.

As soon as you push back on any intellectual level, their opinions and arguments fall to pieces. They aren't rational, and they don't care that people will continue to die because of their "rights." They are man-children, and they have people on the radio and TV who tell them that the evil black president is going to steal their toys away and make them eat broccoli.

# ¿ Jan 24, 2013 01:33

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Kugyou no Tenshi posted:

You do realize that's a "may issue" state, right? That means that you can fulfill all of the requirements laid out and still be denied a permit purely at the state's discretion, and the only way the denial will be overturned is if it's found in court that the denial was "arbitrary and capricious". You can be denied if someone didn't think your reason was solid enough (including people saying on other forums that if you put anything other than "hunting" or "target shooting" as your reason, you'll be denied in certain counties), and the fact that you were denied once can be used against you should you apply again, which discourages people from applying in the first place. It's not as simple as you're painting it.

I fail to see an issue here. Do you think they should have to give them out to anyone who applies for them? doesn't they defeat the purpose of the application process in the first place? Taking the decision away from the state basically means that there is no discretion over who gets a CCW and who doesn't.

So ultimately your complaint is that there is a application process at all.

800peepee51doodoo posted:

It isn't even all right wingers either. I'm fb friends with this guy I did some work for who's leftist as gently caress, works as an immigration lawyer and pro amnesty activist and he went completely off the deep end when this gun issue exploded, just started posting crazy rear end poo poo straight from every right wing cesspool on the internet. There's something in the gun issue that's just straight brain poison.

I agree, it is not limited to any political ideology, but confirmation bias makes it seem like a right wing only problem. My best friend who is an actual socialist is the same way. as soon as the gun issue reared its head he wouldn't shut up about gun grabbers and OBAMA!!!

Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Jan 24, 2013

# ¿ Jan 24, 2013 01:59

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

vyelkin posted:

Someone on my facebook posted this article:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2013/01/30/think-consumption-is-the-engine-of-our-economy-think-again/

I'm going to respond with "Supply-side economics at its worst. What this article completely overlooks in trying to make the point about consumption not driving 100% of the economy is that businesses consume products too. The author is taking consumer goods purchases and defining just that as consumption to try and make arguments that demand is not the economy's driving force. If you think of a value chain leading up to a consumer buying a $50 pair of pants, that $50 paid by the consumer to a retail outlet may not 100% of the value added by the production of those pants, but it's missing the point: the store will have purchased those pants from the factory that manufactured them, which will have in turn purchased raw materials from another source. In both cases, those interactions are driven by demand, not supply. No one is going to want to extract those raw materials or refine them into pants if the consumer on the end is not going to buy them. Just because the raw material extraction and factory production don't sell directly to the consumer doesn't mean they're not driven by the increased demand of the store wanting to buy pants to resell, and the factory wanting to buy raw materials to refine. Increasing supply by promoting savings and investment will help facilitate increased demand, but won't create it.

Even the example the author uses of their own diaper business is flawed. They claim it would have required more investment, not more demand, to be viable. But in fact that investment was only ever a viable option because the demand existed in the first place. They considered expanding because they thought they could make those sales, and investment would have facilitated that. If there was not enough demand for the product, increasing investment to allow them to increase productivity would have been a total waste because their product still would not have sold. The fault there lies not in the demand/consumption side of the equation, but rather in the fact that they didn't think the rewards from expanding their business would be as valuable as starting a new media enterprise instead."

I'm kind of unsure on my analysis of the diaper example though.

The tip-off that the article is complete bullshit is in the second paragraph.

Forbes posted:

The systematic failure by Keynesian economists and pundits to distinguish between consuming and producing value is the single most damaging fallacy in popular economic thinking.

I can't even begin to say how stupid of a sentence this is. It's actually quite hilarious and ironic because the economic model that he is pushing (supply side) IS the most damaging fallacy in popular economic theory.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2013 02:02

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Mornacale posted:

This isn't surprising. San Francisco, for all its rap as a liberal haven, is also awash with rich, young men working in the tech sector, which is the perfect habitat to spontaneously generate libertarians.

You hit the nail on the loving head there. I'm in the tech sector in the bay area, and sooooo many of my peers are libertarians. It is difficult being the only progressive individual that I know of in my field. I don't know how why it is that way, but it is a very real phenomena.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2013 03:29

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

800peepee51doodoo posted:

And one by one, the students rose from their chairs and began to applaud...

And The school was closed the next day for under performing. The entire student body was transferred to various private charter schools in the local area. Property taxes were then lowered as there as no public school left to fund. Reagan's ghost could be seen shedding a single tear.

:negative:

# ¿ Feb 22, 2013 01:42

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

SalTheBard posted:

I guess I don't understand something, do states have to comply with Federal regulations? If they do how do bills like Alaska HB 69 �An Act exempting certain firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in this state from federal regulation; declaring certain federal statutes, regulations, rules, and orders unconstitutional under the Constitution of the United States and unenforceable in this state; providing criminal penalties for federal officials who enforce or attempt to enforce a federal statute, regulation, rule, or order regulating certain firearms and firearm accessories in this state; and providing for an effective date.�

Is this just Alaskan Senators being blowhards or what?

See: Medical Marijuana, voting rights, car emissions standards, gay marriage, slavery, and a host of other issues that have arisen in the history of the US.

The layman explanation is that since the civil war federal law supersedes state law. But the states still decide to say gently caress that sometimes. It is then up the the feds to determine if they should do something about it. If they want they can make the state's life really difficult, but for many things they just let it happen.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2013 19:00

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Phone posted:

He was probably referring to reddit.

We'd like to think that.

# ¿ May 11, 2013 18:43

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

myron cope posted:

My wife works as a server at a well-known national restaurant chain. They pay her a wage of $2.38 an hour. I've seen it on her checks. It's unbelievable. Her last check has 0.05 hours at $7.25 and the rest at $2.38. Making servers rely on tips is mind-boggling. Also mind-boggling: people that don't tip (or don't tip well, like $5 on a $70+ check). But that's a different issue.

Any restaurant that does this should be burned to the ground and the wait staff should piss on the ashes. It is on its face so loving evil that anyone who advocates for it is equally as evil.

# ¿ Aug 29, 2013 20:37

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.