My spidey senses are jinglin' janglin'. Seems like something may happen around midnight tonight. I can never be quite certain, though.
It's somewhat of a recurring thing that sort of thing Graphics posted. Probably just about people that's full of shit when it comes to choosing a suitable mate.
I know he's definitely not going to get the Republican nomination, but is there any reason why I should like the guy that apart from his "consistent" record?
OK Soapbox time
I try not to get too political but here is my take on Ron Paul. He upholds the US Constitution unlike any of the other candidates. His first act (if he was made president) would be to return the balance of power back to the legislative branch with Congress. Presently the executive office has more power than the founding fathers intended. So all who think he has some bat shit crazy ideas can sleep well knowing Congress will keep his bat shit crazy ideas in check.
I don't agree with all his Libertarian ideas, for example I think some things are better kept in the public sector such as roads, bridges, the police, and fire departments IMO for example. The one area I do really agree is on monetary policy and understand I don't care about left vs. right or right vs. wrong. I simply see ideas that work or don't work. That said, the left fully embraces Keynesian economics (John Maynard Keynes) and the Ron Paul being a Libertarian embraces Austrian economics (Friedrich Hayek).
When it comes to Keynesian theory there are two glaring flaws that always stand out to me.
1. They never think debt is a problem, and they never address the topic of currency debasement. It's as if it does not exist in their minds.
2. They never can explain how we're going to crawl off the cliff of massive debt. That government debt does not follow the same basic rules as personal debt.
In 1982 the national debt had just passed $1 trillion dollars, I recall how at that time everyone called it a problem, we had time but everyone left and right knew it needed to get knocked down. Here we sit today 30 years later at $16 trillion and we now have people in denial justifying why it's really not a problem at all.
He recently debated the poster boy of Keynesian economics Paul Krugman on Bloomberg, it's a good watch and lets you see exactly where he stands. http://www.bloomberg...video/91689761/
Krugman makes a few ridiculous comments "a completely unmanaged economy is subject to extreme volatility and is subject to extreme downturns." He seems to think that the entire current economic crisis is the result of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 2000 (the stockmarket trading safeguards that were in place). He fails to realize we have had a managed economy for since the 1930's and that huge trade imbalances with countries like China and Japan occurred in a managed economy. Also the dot com implosion occurred in a managed economy as well.
The other thing I find laughable is he thinks raising our national debt to 30 points ($30 trillion) is OK while acknowledging some riskKrugman says "he doesn't want to see Japanese levels of debt (200% debt to GDP) although it turns out they can carry it". This is just so naive, the lost decade was the result of government intervention with stimulus where the banks were saved and it created zombie banks and stagnation for over 10 years. The truth is Japan has never recovered and still to this day has a stagnate economy as a result. Japan has been in deep shit for 20 years.
Here the US stands doing just what the Japanese did for the last 4 years. We too have a stagnate economy and zombie banks. Recovery? What recovery? Our entire recovery is borrowed prosperity from tomorrow, at some point interest rates will go up and when they reach 6 to 8%, the interest to service the debt on the $16 trillion we have will exceed expense of all the wars combined since WWII! When we get to that point, were fucked, and no amount of optimism is going to pull us out.
The telling thing about Krugman is in his own words. Krugman never saw the crisis coming and he admitted it in his column on Oct 26 2008.
Ron Paul warned of the implications with frightening accurate detail of our monetary actions since the breakdown of Breton-Woods 40 years ahead of the 2008 crisis.
A lot of people don't realize it's not just the US that is printing like crazy, everyone is.
This Is the First Time In History that All Central Banks Have Printed Money at the Same Time … And They’re Failing Miserably http://www.zerohedge...d-they%E2%80%99
Many in the US think Ron Paul is nuts on gold and silver believing it's not money any longer (it only ceased being that as of 1971). However China and India both make up half the worlds population and they know it's money, you don't have to convince the people of China or India of that. They alone have the power to flip money back towards gold and silver regardless of what people in the US want to believe.
I believe our money should have the value built into the money itself, not determined by old crotches in a marble room who profess to have our interests at heart.
This reminds me of a post I saw a couple of months ago. Everyone was nitpicking D3 so they found a picture like this of a hot girl and did the exact same thing for a comparison of how retarded posters are on what they are whining about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Here the US stands doing just what the Japanese did for the last 4 years. We too have a stagnate economy and zombie banks. Recovery? What recovery? Our entire recovery is borrowed prosperity from tomorrow, at some point interest rates will go up and when they reach 6 to 8%, the interest to service the debt on the $16 trillion we have will exceed expense of all the wars combined since WWII! When we get to that point, were fucked, and no amount of optimism is going to pull us out.
My exact thought when Bush was voted in twice, the US then lost its world power status and your economy is doomed... sadly it affects all of us. By any normal economic laws your currency should be worthless!!
Also the rest of your post is very valid, the only thing that will stabilize the global economy is going back to the gold standard, money is to volatile to be a basis of value.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
I think it doesn't matter if Romney or Obama get elected because neither will do enough to change course. I hate being a fatalist, but I think we are in a for a very hard lesson. This economic crisis is just beginning, like G-Man in Half Life 2 said to Alyx Vance "Prepare for unforeseen consequences", all our borrowed stimulus money comes at a cost and the devil will be paid one way or another.
That's not what you asked though, yes I think Obama will win again because the GOP is not excited about Romney, he was the cream of the crap. None wanted Ron Paul because he would change things and the media went out of it's way to paint him as crazy and then never speak of him again. The interesting thing is Ron Paul easily makes up 25% of the GOP supporters and I can assure you they will never in a million years vote for either Romney or Obama. You can count them out completely, with that lost support Obama is a shoe in.
Trannsvaal the answer lies in WWII and how the US became one of the world powers. The US stayed out of WWII for most of the war, we sold weapons to the Allied forces for gold under a program called the Cash and Carry program. We took in the worlds gold in exchange for weapons to fight the war. After we drained the world of its gold, we then sold under the Lend and Lease program where we extended credit for weapons and demanded payment later making us the largest creditor nation in the world. Because the US had all the worlds gold our dollar was considered "good as gold", for this reason all the other nations of the world pegged their currency to the US in 1944.
That is how we got our special banking rights. Then Vietnam happened and France not believing we could pay off our debt for the war effort began to drain our vaults of gold under the Breton Woods agreement. They were right we have yet to pay off Vietnam. The US basically admitted to insolvency and closed the gold window August 15th 1971 by executive order. Breton Woods ended (for the record it was flawed and no one expected it to last). The Federal Reserve Note became the new US dollar and in the stroke of a pen the entire world pegged to our dollar all became free floating fiat currency. Their were issues though because countries demand for dollars lost it's luster and our reserve currency status was threatened.
Then in June of 1974, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger established the US-Saudi Arabian Joint Commission on Economic Cooperation. One of the major components of this commission stated that OPEC would officially agree to sell its oil only for dollars—meaning any country purchasing oil from OPEC had to pay in U.S. dollars. This agreement enormously increased the demand for the floating dollar, as oil importing countries now had to earn or borrow dollars to pay for their oil. The petrodollar was invented, credit replaced money, debt was sold to the people as the new panacea of economics. That house house of cards is now about to come to an end inside this decade.
Freaking hilarious yo!
+1.
Dunno why the rest of you are getting your panties in a mix about this though. I find this contemptuous sarcasm rather refreshing in a world where appearance takes precedence over most traits of a person.
No Collection version for me but I finally got around to per-ordering my online game and downloaded the install file.... now what. All my games I was playing are bleh I lost all will of fun.... must...must... must play Diablo 3!!!
EDIT: BTW I want to pet that kitty very much, so cute!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Lol.. I get the "humor" of it Nekrodrac. Some of them are kind of funny (like the cat one I posted). But picking someone apart like that is why a lot of people aren't comfortable in their own skin.
Women with certain body types having been glorified throughout the media/fashion industry and portrayed as 'ideal' is what have deepened the sense of insecurity felt by girls and women around the world. Add to the bill anorexi and bulimea and you have a right mess on top of all that crap.
That chick on the pic is so obviously pretty (from most males' perspectives I would imagine) that picking her apart like that and making her out to be undesirable is simply...hilarious.
Thinking that this is what makes women insecure is why I think you don't get the 'humor' at all.
Believe it or not Nekrodrac, there are people that are uncomfortable about the silliest of things despite being "beautiful" in the public eye. There are people with low self esteem that these pictures might lower it even further. Why do you think plastic surgery is such a big business today? Because people aren't comfortable with themselves. Hollywood and the media have a lot to do with that.. but so does growing up and getting bullied.
And yes... I can see both perspectives of this, I get it's funny to some people... but I just don't find it funny. It's not a matter of being too dense to get the humor, it's just a matter of personal opinion.
I don't mean to go on about this... but it's always been something that bugs me.
No Collection version for me but I finally got around to per-ordering my online game and downloaded the install file.... now what. All my games I was playing are bleh I lost all will of fun.... must...must... must play Diablo 3!!!
I'm the same way. I don't think any other game will have my interest betrween now and launch. I'm going to find non-gaming things to do. Hopefully I'll be on the lake this weekend, doing some canoeing, tanning and reading. Then next weekend, I don't know. I'll figure out soemthing else outside to do probably, since it's finally feeling like summer here.
Collector's Edition was a tough choice for me. I still regret spending the extra sometimes. That could have been shoes, a tank of gas, a few nice meals out, a couple of Steam games.
Women with certain body types having been glorified throughout the media/fashion industry and portrayed as 'ideal' is what have deepened the sense of insecurity felt by girls and women around the world. Add to the bill anorexi and bulimea and you have a right mess on top of all that crap.
That chick on the pic is so obviously pretty (from most males' perspectives I would imagine) that picking her apart like that and making her out to be undesirable is simply...hilarious.
Thinking that this is what makes women insecure is why I think you don't get the 'humor' at all.
You are right about the media and fashion industries being a catalyst for a lot of insecurities. Back in my teens I woudl flp through a lot of catalogs and feel like my waist to hip ratio was way off, or that my stomach wasn't toned enough. But most fashion shots rely heavily on posing and angles to agsagerate traits. So not only do they idealize a particular body type, but then use tricks to enhance that ideal past barely possible, to completely impossible. It's definitely not a healthy state of affairs.
However, I don't see how leveling sarcastic criticism at a photo challenges the beauty ideal in any useful way.
Further, you previously mention everyone getting their "panties in a mix" over that post, but somehow, I'm completely overlooking that part of the conversation. I see nothing but light discussion specualting about the intent of the meme's creator.
Personally, I don't see it as inflamatory. It's just unfunny. My first thought when I saw it was "Oh, someone over-analyzing someone's body and pointing out anything they percieve as less than ideal, as if they were dealing with something inanimate instead of a person. That's nothing new."
Further, you previously mention everyone getting their "panties in a mix" over that post, but somehow, I'm completely overlooking that part of the conversation. I see nothing but light discussion specualting about the intent of the meme's creator.
Poor analytical skills on your behalf I suppose.
People were actually trying to defend the girl therefore my prompting my conclusion of their disapproval of said picture.
Personally, I don't see it as inflamatory. It's just unfunny. My first thought when I saw it was "Oh, someone over-analyzing someone's body and pointing out anything they percieve as less than ideal, as if they were dealing with something inanimate instead of a person. That's nothing new."
I think this point of view arises from the conception of the idea that though the girl is pretty, she isn't that pretty.
I find her to be severely bang-able (personality withstanding). Therefore trying to make her out as undesirable is just comically unreal. Simple as that.
A question for you and Tralari- what would you rate that girl on a scale of 0-10.
10 being ideal obviously.
Try and be as honest as possible for the sake of the discussion.
Believe it or not Nekrodrac, there are people that are uncomfortable about the silliest of things despite being "beautiful" in the public eye. There are people with low self esteem that these pictures might lower it even further. Why do you think plastic surgery is such a big business today? Because people aren't comfortable with themselves. Hollywood and the media have a lot to do with that.. but so does growing up and getting bullied.
And yes... I can see both perspectives of this, I get it's funny to some people... but I just don't find it funny. It's not a matter of being too dense to get the humor, it's just a matter of personal opinion.
I don't mean to go on about this... but it's always been something that bugs me.
I suppose it is truly a matter of perspective.
One can feel insecure by this picture. Or maybe they can look at it and realize that no girl is or can be perfect. If one wants to nitpick, they will.
In any case the nitpicking on this pic is way too retarded to be taken seriously.
Let alone personality flaws or issues, a girl feeling insecure through those means is just....not very bright.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Strong message tone potential
My spidey senses are jinglin' janglin'. Seems like something may happen around midnight tonight. I can never be quite certain, though.
It's somewhat of a recurring thing that sort of thing Graphics posted. Probably just about people that's full of shit when it comes to choosing a suitable mate.
OK Soapbox time
I try not to get too political but here is my take on Ron Paul. He upholds the US Constitution unlike any of the other candidates. His first act (if he was made president) would be to return the balance of power back to the legislative branch with Congress. Presently the executive office has more power than the founding fathers intended. So all who think he has some bat shit crazy ideas can sleep well knowing Congress will keep his bat shit crazy ideas in check.
I don't agree with all his Libertarian ideas, for example I think some things are better kept in the public sector such as roads, bridges, the police, and fire departments IMO for example. The one area I do really agree is on monetary policy and understand I don't care about left vs. right or right vs. wrong. I simply see ideas that work or don't work. That said, the left fully embraces Keynesian economics (John Maynard Keynes) and the Ron Paul being a Libertarian embraces Austrian economics (Friedrich Hayek).
When it comes to Keynesian theory there are two glaring flaws that always stand out to me.
In 1982 the national debt had just passed $1 trillion dollars, I recall how at that time everyone called it a problem, we had time but everyone left and right knew it needed to get knocked down. Here we sit today 30 years later at $16 trillion and we now have people in denial justifying why it's really not a problem at all.
He recently debated the poster boy of Keynesian economics Paul Krugman on Bloomberg, it's a good watch and lets you see exactly where he stands.
http://www.bloomberg...video/91689761/
Krugman makes a few ridiculous comments "a completely unmanaged economy is subject to extreme volatility and is subject to extreme downturns." He seems to think that the entire current economic crisis is the result of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 2000 (the stockmarket trading safeguards that were in place). He fails to realize we have had a managed economy for since the 1930's and that huge trade imbalances with countries like China and Japan occurred in a managed economy. Also the dot com implosion occurred in a managed economy as well.
The other thing I find laughable is he thinks raising our national debt to 30 points ($30 trillion) is OK while acknowledging some risk
Here the US stands doing just what the Japanese did for the last 4 years. We too have a stagnate economy and zombie banks. Recovery? What recovery? Our entire recovery is borrowed prosperity from tomorrow, at some point interest rates will go up and when they reach 6 to 8%, the interest to service the debt on the $16 trillion we have will exceed expense of all the wars combined since WWII! When we get to that point, were fucked, and no amount of optimism is going to pull us out.
The telling thing about Krugman is in his own words. Krugman never saw the crisis coming and he admitted it in his column on Oct 26 2008.
“But I never anticipated anything like what’s happening now.”
http://krugman.blogs...currency-crises
Ron Paul warned of the implications with frightening accurate detail of our monetary actions since the breakdown of Breton-Woods 40 years ahead of the 2008 crisis.
A lot of people don't realize it's not just the US that is printing like crazy, everyone is.
This Is the First Time In History that All Central Banks Have Printed Money at the Same Time … And They’re Failing Miserably
http://www.zerohedge...d-they%E2%80%99
Many in the US think Ron Paul is nuts on gold and silver believing it's not money any longer (it only ceased being that as of 1971). However China and India both make up half the worlds population and they know it's money, you don't have to convince the people of China or India of that. They alone have the power to flip money back towards gold and silver regardless of what people in the US want to believe.
I believe our money should have the value built into the money itself, not determined by old crotches in a marble room who profess to have our interests at heart.
This reminds me of a post I saw a couple of months ago. Everyone was nitpicking D3 so they found a picture like this of a hot girl and did the exact same thing for a comparison of how retarded posters are on what they are whining about.
My exact thought when Bush was voted in twice, the US then lost its world power status and your economy is doomed... sadly it affects all of us. By any normal economic laws your currency should be worthless!!
Also the rest of your post is very valid, the only thing that will stabilize the global economy is going back to the gold standard, money is to volatile to be a basis of value.
*~*~*~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~ :)~*~*~*~*
@Succubus_queen - Shweeeeeet!
I think it doesn't matter if Romney or Obama get elected because neither will do enough to change course. I hate being a fatalist, but I think we are in a for a very hard lesson. This economic crisis is just beginning, like G-Man in Half Life 2 said to Alyx Vance "Prepare for unforeseen consequences", all our borrowed stimulus money comes at a cost and the devil will be paid one way or another.
That's not what you asked though, yes I think Obama will win again because the GOP is not excited about Romney, he was the cream of the crap. None wanted Ron Paul because he would change things and the media went out of it's way to paint him as crazy and then never speak of him again. The interesting thing is Ron Paul easily makes up 25% of the GOP supporters and I can assure you they will never in a million years vote for either Romney or Obama. You can count them out completely, with that lost support Obama is a shoe in.
That is how we got our special banking rights. Then Vietnam happened and France not believing we could pay off our debt for the war effort began to drain our vaults of gold under the Breton Woods agreement. They were right we have yet to pay off Vietnam. The US basically admitted to insolvency and closed the gold window August 15th 1971 by executive order. Breton Woods ended (for the record it was flawed and no one expected it to last). The Federal Reserve Note became the new US dollar and in the stroke of a pen the entire world pegged to our dollar all became free floating fiat currency. Their were issues though because countries demand for dollars lost it's luster and our reserve currency status was threatened.
Then in June of 1974, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger established the US-Saudi Arabian Joint Commission on Economic Cooperation. One of the major components of this commission stated that OPEC would officially agree to sell its oil only for dollars—meaning any country purchasing oil from OPEC had to pay in U.S. dollars. This agreement enormously increased the demand for the floating dollar, as oil importing countries now had to earn or borrow dollars to pay for their oil. The petrodollar was invented, credit replaced money, debt was sold to the people as the new panacea of economics. That house house of cards is now about to come to an end inside this decade.
It's a stupid meme.. I hate that one.
http://knowyourmeme....-would-not-bang
This kind of makes me laugh, though.. even though it's kind of mean. The cat's face makes me lol.
Hooray!
Ha ha those videos were funny.
Freaking hilarious yo!
+1.
Dunno why the rest of you are getting your panties in a mix about this though. I find this contemptuous sarcasm rather refreshing in a world where appearance takes precedence over most traits of a person.
EDIT: BTW I want to pet that kitty very much, so cute!
@Slayerviper: I would pet that kitty too!
Women with certain body types having been glorified throughout the media/fashion industry and portrayed as 'ideal' is what have deepened the sense of insecurity felt by girls and women around the world. Add to the bill anorexi and bulimea and you have a right mess on top of all that crap.
That chick on the pic is so obviously pretty (from most males' perspectives I would imagine) that picking her apart like that and making her out to be undesirable is simply...hilarious.
Thinking that this is what makes women insecure is why I think you don't get the 'humor' at all.
And yes... I can see both perspectives of this, I get it's funny to some people... but I just don't find it funny. It's not a matter of being too dense to get the humor, it's just a matter of personal opinion.
I don't mean to go on about this... but it's always been something that bugs me.
I'm the same way. I don't think any other game will have my interest betrween now and launch. I'm going to find non-gaming things to do. Hopefully I'll be on the lake this weekend, doing some canoeing, tanning and reading. Then next weekend, I don't know. I'll figure out soemthing else outside to do probably, since it's finally feeling like summer here.
Collector's Edition was a tough choice for me. I still regret spending the extra sometimes. That could have been shoes, a tank of gas, a few nice meals out, a couple of Steam games.
You are right about the media and fashion industries being a catalyst for a lot of insecurities. Back in my teens I woudl flp through a lot of catalogs and feel like my waist to hip ratio was way off, or that my stomach wasn't toned enough. But most fashion shots rely heavily on posing and angles to agsagerate traits. So not only do they idealize a particular body type, but then use tricks to enhance that ideal past barely possible, to completely impossible. It's definitely not a healthy state of affairs.
However, I don't see how leveling sarcastic criticism at a photo challenges the beauty ideal in any useful way.
Further, you previously mention everyone getting their "panties in a mix" over that post, but somehow, I'm completely overlooking that part of the conversation. I see nothing but light discussion specualting about the intent of the meme's creator.
Personally, I don't see it as inflamatory. It's just unfunny. My first thought when I saw it was "Oh, someone over-analyzing someone's body and pointing out anything they percieve as less than ideal, as if they were dealing with something inanimate instead of a person. That's nothing new."
I said i found it hilarious(and refreshing). Not life or society-changing.
Get a grip.
Poor analytical skills on your behalf I suppose.
People were actually trying to defend the girl therefore my prompting my conclusion of their disapproval of said picture.
I think this point of view arises from the conception of the idea that though the girl is pretty, she isn't that pretty.
I find her to be severely bang-able (personality withstanding). Therefore trying to make her out as undesirable is just comically unreal. Simple as that.
A question for you and Tralari- what would you rate that girl on a scale of 0-10.
10 being ideal obviously.
Try and be as honest as possible for the sake of the discussion.
I suppose it is truly a matter of perspective.
One can feel insecure by this picture. Or maybe they can look at it and realize that no girl is or can be perfect. If one wants to nitpick, they will.
In any case the nitpicking on this pic is way too retarded to be taken seriously.
Let alone personality flaws or issues, a girl feeling insecure through those means is just....not very bright.