I wonder where I am in line. Probably around 5,000,000th, slightly above average as almost of my family tree is British.

Any day now.

No one's trying to cram anything down your throat, like I said, eat whatever and however the fuck you want to.

Yea the guy in the vid has a pretty strong douchebag vibe to him, and yea he goes about making his point not in the most delicate way. That doesn't change the fact that most of what he says is more or less true.

This isn't about your personal preference, it's about how Sushi, the dish (and Nigiri and Sashimi and whatever) is meant to be eaten, in order to be able to fully appreciate the taste of raw fish.

Again, like it or not, raw fish isn't hamburger or cornflakes or whatever. Being able to appreciate a good slice of raw fish requires that, for example, you don't put fucking ginger on top of it, the whole point of it being there is to cleanse the pallet between the different fish you're eating, so you'll be able to properly taste them - when you put it on top of the fish you're basically guaranteeing that you won't be able to feel the taste. It's there for a practical reason, not as a condiment. Same goes for dipping the entire thing in soy sauce, or whatever.
Even his point about eating with your hands as opposed to chopsticks is sorta valid. Many above-average sushi dishes WILL fall apart when you try and pick them up with chopsticks.

And no, you don't have to go to a 5 Michelin starred restaurant to be able to get a good dish of raw fish. Even a market stand will do if the fish are fresh.

At least realize that this "stench of aristocracy" you're referring to is a Western phenomenon, and you perceive it as such because generally it's much more common to see stuck-up pedantic bastards being strict about these kinds of things, as opposed to most people who just wanna shove crap in their mouths and have it taste "yummy".
That doesn't change the fact that these assholes didn't invent the way sushi is "meant" to be eaten, that there is a difference between a piece of fresh fish and one that's been frozen for months, and that that delicate difference, to be noticeable and appreciable has to be shown the proper respect.
Or you can just deep fry it.

...is this your video...are you part of Above Average Productions?

OK, Texas isn't as much a gun owner paradise as I thought. There are states with less restrictions.
And firearm-related death rate is only a bit above average.

I found no state-by-state gun ownership statistics! It would be intersting.

➶➶➶
That quotient becomes irrelevant to the adrenal junkie. Above average digits are sometimes an indicator that someone is not only extremely intelligent, but and in MANY cases, batshit fucking "insane" or difficult to codify in the very least.

He's smart enough to make a fat enough stack of cabbage from his You Tube channels to afford all that hi-cal ammo and tannerite, play all day long and blow shit up to feed that monkey!

Not to mention the straaange following him around everywhere...The guy no-doubt attracts a lotta tail!

@jimnms

(1)

I don't accept that the US is a more violent country by nature, therefore to me approaching it by cutting down all violence as you say is not plausible.

People can wax lyrically about a gun and violence obsessed culture but as far as I'm concerned the pervasiveness of Western society means you can say that about just about any country nowadays.

Socio-economic conditions determine the rate of murder and all indicators show that despite the US having a high per capita income rate, it has a drastically above average murder rate.

The only logical conclusion I see is that the easy availability of guns empowers the ratio of violent people with a tool designed to liquefy people's insides resulting in this.

(2)

I agree that the media focus on mass shootings ignores the wider issue. It is true however that mass shootings are certainly more common in the US that in equally highly developed countries so that mere fact is still newsworthy. The significantly higher murder rate of the US to any other developed country should be the issue but nobody seems to ever talk about it from the snippets I see.

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

You mention China. Mass murder sprees certainly can happen in any country regardless of gun regulation. Nothing will stop the occasional delusion but resourceful individual from improvising but it stands to reason that looking at the wider trend, despite China being drastically less developed it's murder rate per capita is 20% of the US.

>> ^bobknight33:

This doesn't deserve any press. Sure the guy miss spoke in a big way. But being a Republican teh leftest medis makes great hey about it.
The Leftest media also says nothing about the Democrat who Craigslist a boy for a blow job at at rest stop. This also happened the other day and he is also up for a state election post. Now one in his party is calling for him to step down. Nope. Don't hear jack about the Molester Democrat form the leftest media but show after show for 2 days bashing the Republican. Think the media is biased?


try again bob, it's been reported, and he stepped down of his own accord. I know your reading and writing skills aren't above average, but please do put some effort into it if you're going to put forth your own biases as reality. If you're going to have a bias, make sure it's backed up with fact.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/minnesota-lawmaker-in-rest-stop-sex-scandal-with-teen-boy-says-he-wont-drop-re-election-bid/2012/08/22/2cbb4904
-ec8c-11e1-866f-60a00f604425_story.html

Good for you, the earlier the better. My son was finally diagnosed as Asperger's at about 8 and having him and everyone around him aware of his differences, abilities and disabilities allowed him to develop coping strategies and minimize the stresses and anxieties he was experiencing. He's now an above average student in university.

Why did he say "civilian life". Is he ex- military or something? I looked arond on the web , I dont see the usual in depth backround on this guy. Normally when a nutcase goes "BigTime" , I'll hear all about his past, eveything, hometown, high school, grad year , collage, work history. Did I just miss the background info on this one. Noramally my google power is above average. Was this guy a Vet or have a history of mental illness( was he on prescribed drugs????).

This movie was great. Fight scenes were fast, very well choreographed and often very brutal; the heroes are definitely not afraid to use weapons. I was also surprised that the story and acting were quite good, well above average for your typical martial arts movie. Great movie, there

>> ^Deano:


I think the smart answer from you would be to accept I'm not going to type hundreds of names out for you. That's not a real answer or proof. Your response is disingenuous.
We're going with our knowledge of what this demographic is. Note I've never said or claimed that footballers are universally "dumb". I said they aren't especially bright. I have said and will always maintain they certainly are not the smartest slice of the population. And by the way going back to the video, Mitchell is clearly taking the piss. It is a comedy program with exaggeration a key component.
"Thick people can't handle school"? I think there's a huge number of educationalists would argue that one. Provision levels and equality of opportunity along with socio-economic factors play a huge role. Footballers from poor working-class families more often find themselves excluded from progressing in the educational system and it's not always because they're "thick". In London I know the debate re the lack of educational achievement in boys linked to the decline in male teachers. You cross that with the race issue and it's even more complicated.
Ah now you're going with my definition of football intelligence? Well that's what I've been driving at. They're good at football. They know how hard to strike the ball, when to time a run, how to employ gamesmanship. They have good spatial awareness. You could now start to talk about different kinds of intelligence. But that's a bloody complicated area. I would however continue to separate football smarts from intellectual ones and general life skills.
You're right, having good advice on hand is advantageous. But some footballers are smarter than others. Tevez for example might be the dumbest, or unluckiest, guy in the game. Mostly the infrastructure is already in place for these guys. Word of mouth is important. I would love to know whether they would make more or less if they didn't employ representation. It would be interesting to know wouldn't it? I suspect it would take a huge amount of balls at a young age to do it yourself or entrust mum or dad.
I never intended to claim Klinnsman's diving was dumb, merely that I note it as a low light of his professional career. I saw him play once and he was excellent in what was really a workmanlike Spurs team.
I'll call it a draw with Barton. I don't know if you're calling me dumb but yes he is an unpleasant thug. He's a moron who's been unable to learn from his mistakes. Guess who's got the most yellow cards for QPR this season?


Of course you're not going to type out hundreds of names and that wouldn't be enough anyway - that's my point. I could name clever footballers - including ones who have a reputation for being dumb (Frank Lampard) - which would be pointless too. It's all anecdotal, it's basically meaningless.

I'm not sure what point you're making with regards to education, "it's not always because they're 'thick'" seems to be agreeing with me.

I didn't mean to say you're dumb, I was referring to Barton's thug past implying that he isn't a genius. Getting most yellow cards isn't necessarily bad, he's a tough tackling midfielder so it's his job to throw himself about (and getting a booking is clever if it stops a goal!). I took your comment about Klinsmann diving to mean he's stupid, sorry about that.

It's certainly complicated and the socio-economic and race issues you touched on only make it more so. In fairness, I don't know. You make good points and you aren't falling into the trap that bugs me, the idea that British footballers are barely capable of tying their shoe laces (or putting on their own bibs ... oh!). I expect they are above average, a bit, but you make good arguments for them being a bit below average.

This clip is from Mock the Week, there was a Franky Boyle bit about the England team writing their own song (this is the best I can find: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpbvF1dESFY&feature=related ). I know this is exaggerated for comic effect but for me, people saying that or laughing at that are the thick ones. Comic exaggeration of an already at-best exaggerated opinion is brainless.

>> ^Quboid:

That's 3 names. How many professional footballers are there? This are young men with a lot of money. Of course some will do stupid things. Joey Barton? Why do you think he's stupid? He's a pretentious, self-righteous hypocrite, but none of those mean he's stupid.
Being thick isn't the same as being uneducated. They aren't well educated but this is because they went into football, not because they couldn't handle it. Quite a few have got degrees in their plentiful spare time while playing.
Of course foreigners can be twits. That you would imply I'd think otherwise is what I mean, this idea that footballers, especially British footballers, are uniquely thick.
Why do I think they are probably above average? Because if you have two players of equal technical ability, strength, fitness, etc, the one who is smarter will generally do better and therefore play in a higher standard of league. Egro, the smart rise to the top. Since intelligence isn't a particularly important part of football, the effect this has will be small, it still exists.
Charlie Adam is rubbish, I'll give you that.


How many names am I supposed to give you? Is there a specific number that should convince you? Put it like this ff you were mining the wisdom of crowds they'd be the last crowd you'd go with.

A lack of education, also known as ignorance and poor critical thinking is linked to lack of comprehension and the wider phenomenon of stupidity.

You're incorrect about intelligence being a differentiator on the field. The number one characteristic coaches look for is attitude. Players with an intense competitive desire and a controllable amount of aggression WITH talent are the ones who make it.

Off the pitch, being able to make smart decisions about contracts, sponsorship is where you'd be right. Actually maybe that means Beckham is a genius and I'm totally wrong! Or maybe he's well advised.

I always admired Klinnsman in that regard. If you forgot the diving you might recall he sorted out his own contract and only hired a lawyer and an accountant. The value of an education there is that you actually eke out a bit more money over the long term.

As for Barton his propensity for violence suggests he's not the poster boy for the football intelligentsia. I know he's been working via twitter to build a different kind of reputation but I'm yet to be convinced. It's amazing what you can cut and paste on the web.

That's 3 names. How many professional footballers are there? This are young men with a lot of money. Of course some will do stupid things. Joey Barton? Why do you think he's stupid? He's a pretentious, self-righteous hypocrite, but none of those mean he's stupid.

Being thick isn't the same as being uneducated. They aren't well educated but this is because they went into football, not because they couldn't handle it. Quite a few have got degrees in their plentiful spare time while playing.

Of course foreigners can be twits. That you would imply I'd think otherwise is what I mean, this idea that footballers, especially British footballers, are uniquely thick.

Why do I think they are probably above average? Because if you have two players of equal technical ability, strength, fitness, etc, the one who is smarter will generally do better and therefore play in a higher standard of league. Egro, the smart rise to the top. Since intelligence isn't a particularly important part of football, the effect this has will be small, but it still exists.

Charlie Adam is rubbish, I'll give you that.

Yes, I think this public grief is either insincere or misplaced. Thats a generalisation I know, and there are bound to be exceptions, but for the most part I think its true.

There are famous figures I who's passing would sadden me greatly. Mostly scientists, mostly people that showed me the beauty of reality. The Feynmans and Sagans of today. I suppose in that sense I could rightfully be accused of hypocrisy. If you learnt some life lessons from a speech Steve Jobs made then ok, fair enough, but I mean did it really take him to teach you "memento mori"?

I'm just pissed that a guy can cut all of Apples philanthropic projects, sells overpriced computers in shiny boxes and had above average charisma is suddenly hailed a visionary.

@swedishfriend

1. "Compared to their native Swedish peers, immigrant students, on average, have weaker education outcomes at all levels of education. Nearing the end of compulsory education, at age 15, there are very significant performance disadvantages for immigrant students." Source.



2a. Generally, in the modern era, the achievement gap between the descendants of immigrants and the host population correlates with the achievement gap between the immigrants' nation of origin and the host nation. For example, expect US achievement gaps to be with us for the long-term:
NYT: "Triumph Fades on Racial Gap in City Schools"

2b. US school test scores are virtually the best in the world once you break down test scores by region of ancestry. Asian Americans do better than Asians in Asia; Latino Americans do better than Latinos in Latin America; African Americans do better than Africans in Africa; European Americans do better than Europeans in Europe. The illusion that US scores aren't the best in the world is caused by the demographic composition of the US, not by US school policy.

2c. Indeed, as expected from the US's dominance of international test scores (once broken down by country of origin), descendants of Swedes living in Minnesota significantly outperform Swedes living in Sweden. (Search that post for "achievement gap" to read more about the achievement gap in Sweden between natives and descendants of immigants.)



3. Exceptions: US Muslims, such as Iranian-Americans, significantly outperform other US groups, including the majority group, because they were drawn from high performers in their country of origin, such as scientists.