Mercer Posted January 21, 2019 Author Share Posted January 21, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 18 minutes ago, Mercer said: My favorite one in awhile. Who doesnt love a good Hindenburg meme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 21, 2019 Author Share Posted January 21, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hua Guofang Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 9:28 AM, Kults said: Care to share the broader context? Cause thats exactly what she said when called out on errors. I think people just think shes hot when propped up next to that living corpse Pelosi. On 1/22/2019 at 12:58 AM, Mercer said: Disagree with the out of context statement. They're no more out of context than any quote short enough for memery. What makes those "morally right" memes funny, is the underlying context of the debate. Socialist don't care about the overwhelming evidence showing socialism destroys economies, then living standards. Even the poor are much worse off under Socialism. A Socialist cares more about the intentions of socialism, then it's effect. Claiming it's system is more "fair" without any logical consistency to determine what's actually fair. Basing their platforms, and policies on their emotional appeal, while ignoring Socialism's inevitable catastrophic effects. She made wildly false claims about economic statistics, and defense spending. Once she was called out on her lie/mistake she rebutted with that statement. COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios -- OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness -- COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending? OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right. COOPER: But being factually correct is important-- OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all. So yeah, it was a typical politician's answer where they refuse to say "Yeah, that was wrong, I shouldn't have said it". And the more I read it the more I think I'm making excuses for her, I guess I didn't read it right the first time I saw it. As I said, she's hot though and hot chicks are allowed to say stupid stuff. I think that's only fair. @Mercer I think the outcry over socialiasm in the US and some other democracies gets a little over-blown and blends in with the Us/Them syndrome we're all suffering through these days. I don't think the argument needs to be as absolute as "X ideology is bad, Y Ideology is good". Each system has its benefits and weak points - some are more optomistic than others, some have done pretty badly in some cases and some are pretty outlandish in some ways. However, I find that the argument gets to the point where if anything can be related to an 'sim' of some sort, one side has to start screaming "IT FAILED, IT FAILED" and taking an all or nothing approach. Australia, Sweden, Norway, the UK and many other countries have elements of socialism, such as sliding tax scales, national health systems, welfare for the poor, etc. etc. and these countries are not sliding into inevitable catastrophe. China has been progressively moving towards a more free market model since 1980 and things are improving for massive amounts of people. People seem to discuss these issues like the other side of the discussion is the enemy or if it's a personal competition. I just don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 12 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said: So yeah, it was a typical politician's answer where they refuse to say "Yeah, that was wrong, I shouldn't have said it". And the more I read it the more I think I'm making excuses for her, I guess I didn't read it right the first time I saw it. As I said, she's hot though and hot chicks are allowed to say stupid stuff. I think that's only fair. Glad you can see it now. Shes just as much of a hypocrite as the rest of em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said: I think the outcry over socialiasm in the US and some other democracies gets a little over-blown and blends in with the Us/Them syndrome we're all suffering through these days. I don't think the argument needs to be as absolute as "X ideology is bad, Y Ideology is good". Each system has its benefits and weak points - some are more optomistic than others, some have done pretty badly in some cases and some are pretty outlandish in some ways. However, I find that the argument gets to the point where if anything can be related to an 'sim' of some sort, one side has to start screaming "IT FAILED, IT FAILED" and taking an all or nothing approach. Australia, Sweden, Norway, the UK and many other countries have elements of socialism, such as sliding tax scales, national health systems, welfare for the poor, etc. etc. and these countries are not sliding into inevitable catastrophe. China has been progressively moving towards a more free market model since 1980 and things are improving for massive amounts of people. People seem to discuss these issues like the other side of the discussion is the enemy or if it's a personal competition. I just don't get it. My perspective on Socialism/Communism started when I grew up an Army brat, with both parents stationed in West Germany in the 1980's where you could physically see devastating effects of Communism. The "iron curtain" was real as fuck, as it is today where you have two very different economic systems on a border for contrast Like in Korea. Further solidifying my skepticism is the fact my wife left Argentina after Socialist policy reduced it from the worlds 5th largest economy just ahead of France, down to the worlds 26th during her lifetime. My real life arguably anecdotal experiences meeting people from different countries, and historical perspective prejudiced me beyond the point of entertaining socialist foolishness. The historical evidence is overwhelming, the policies she's advocating for would no doubt leave the United States economically worse off as a whole, and have a harmful effect on overall quality of life. Making healthcare a "right" will not magically increase the supply of healthcare services. Mechanism have to be put into place to pay for the increased artificial capacity, this creates a miss-allocation of economic resources people otherwise would choose to spend elsewhere as consumers. Will it be destructive enough to collapse a strong economy on it's own, probably not, but every step in this direction has real consequences that are impossible quantify, but always lead to economic stagnation, inflation, and ultimately collapse the further down that scale of socialism, vs free market. This is a very real concern, our national debt in The United States is at a level we normally only see after a major wars, while our economy keeps growing weaker. I'm afraid something like a 70% tax on all profits would create an even further exodus of potential, and current economic activity, creating dire economic situations for millions of people. I wish it were possible the government could just print as much money as it saw fit, remove economic incentives, and make decisions on what the economy "should" be, and execute a plan that works, but it's my opinion that no matter how well intended, these things never work. Taking individual decision making powers out of the hands of the numerous individuals operating in a free market, reduces the capacity to make sound economic decisions/predictions exponentially. As an example there's a rule there saying no matter what you've negotiated with your employer, there's a mandatory 16 weeks maternity leave in Spain, and once this rule was put into place the number of women of child bearing age that were able to find full time work dropped drastically. Did this policy have an overall positive effect on mothers and children? Probably not since less parents are able to afford having children now. We have friends there, almost none of them are able to find full time work (also due to a multitude of other government policies). I'd hate to go that route here, but see it as a very real possibility in the current political climate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Hah! True. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 26, 2019 Author Share Posted January 26, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted January 26, 2019 Author Share Posted January 26, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hua Guofang Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 11 hours ago, Mercer said: Seriously, where is the line between a meme and advocacy? Is there a line or is that what a meme actually is? I couldn't give a fuck about communism, hate it, don't want it, it's dumbness. But about 30% of what is posted here is just emotional reinforcement and cheerleading rather than creative humour. I kinda picture guys high fiving and saying FUCK YEAH BRO, after some of these memes. And it's got nothing to do with subject matter, I See the same stupid shit against affluence and individualism on another greeny and unionist dominated forum I'm on - like mirror image kind of shit. To quote a former secretary of the treasury over here: people are too deep in the trenches to see the big picture and let go of the fight in case the opposition gets one up on them in pettiness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Man Banned Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 Interesting. Have had mixed feelings about some of these and might even aree that some do lean toward cheerleading, but have gotten some lols so about even. My only complaint, I thought these were supposed to be too spicy for Ch0. Needs more spice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Man Banned Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 The reason they’re too spicy for channel zero is because they get people to break the chain of memes, read too deep into them and derail the thread to talk about politics.. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hua Guofang Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Kults said: The reason they’re too spicy for channel zero is because they get people to break the circle jerk, read too deep into them and derail the thread to talk about politics.. lol Fixed If you weren't supposed to read into them, they'd still be in Channel Zero. Edited January 26, 2019 by Hua Guofang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 I mean of course you can weaponize memes, it’s a large part of what got Donald Trump elected. You guys aren’t wrong. Still, it’s a meme thread, don’t read too much into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kults Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 Show me a good Hilary or Trump meme, I’ll laugh at both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.