search results matching tag: aristocrats

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (21)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (2)     Comments (102)   

stand up jokes that went too far-compilation

spawnflagger says...

Anyone who was offended by these has never actually been to a live stand-up show... it's always much raunchier than their TV material (except for Jerry Seinfeld). Bob Saget.

I recommend watching The Aristocrats" if you've never seen it.
The title-joke itself isn't that funny, but it's a real comedians joke, and it's great to see all of these comedians tell it in their own way. (Gilbert Gottfried's was remarkable)

eric3579 (Member Profile)

radx says...

... and one more for good measure: The Fury and Failure of Donald Trump by Matt Taibbi

Hell of a zinger right at the start:
"Keeping up with Trump revelations is exhausting. By late October, he'll be caught whacking it outside a nunnery. There are not many places left for this thing to go that don't involve kids or cannibalism. We wait, miserably, for the dong shot."

And it only gets better:
"Trump's early rampage through the Republican field made literary sense. It was classic farce. He was the lewd, unwelcome guest who horrified priggish, decent society, a theme that has mesmerized audiences for centuries, from Vanity Fair to The Government Inspector to (closer to home) Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. When you let a hands-y, drunken slob loose at an aristocrats' ball, the satirical power of the story comes from the aristocrats deserving what comes next. And nothing has ever deserved a comeuppance quite like the American presidential electoral process, which had become as exclusive and cut off from the people as a tsarist shooting party."

Police Murder Sleeping Couple On A Date

poolcleaner says...

Aaaaand -- The Clash with their hit song "Know Your Rights":

This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them

Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights

And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation

Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang

Know these rights

Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.

Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well

Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush

Finally then I will read you your rights

You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you

Listen to this
Run

The Jungle Book Trailer (2016)

Ask A Porn Star: What Was Your Grossest On Set Experience

CEO cut's salary so he can raise workers pay to 70,000/yr

petpeeved says...

Shocking that one of the leading mouthpieces and corporate apologists for the diseased form of capitalism that is capsizing the former republic of the United States of America would be predicting that 'market forces' will maintain an environment where CEOs such as Dan Price, who are confused as to which side of the class war they are on, will be strongly discouraged from closing the historical chasm of income disparity with their workers via a complex and myriad assortment of carefully implemented internal structures, that have been embedded over several decades starting with Reagan, and will serve to doom any business to failure for not prizing profit, and the unequal distribution of profit, over all other considerations such as income parity.

The most interesting aspect of this experiment isn't whether it succeeds or fails in the long run but rather that it will someday be used as a prime example by people like Chris Hedges who argue that the form of crony capitalism plaguing the West cannot and should not be reformed but rather destroyed and replaced with a system that doesn't have as its main aim the impoverishment of workers for the sole benefit of an oligarchical aristocratic elite.

lantern53 said:

from Forbes:

Unfortunately, this well-intended gesture is likely to either end badly or just end quietly. It will end badly if the company enacts the program as written, as Gravity is likely to experience reduced investor interest due to unusually high labor costs. A growing company with a $70,000 entry-level wage for every employee will be a difficult sell in the capital markets.

More likely, the plan will end quietly. As investors weigh in and influence company policy, the $70,000 minimum wage is likely to be drastically modified and adjusted. Conditions are likely to be placed on earning the $70,000 minimum, and industry standard wages will be subsidized with bonuses and other cash incentives to maintain the appearance of a $70,000 minimum wage. People unable or unwilling to commit to a bonus-based or incentive-based system will not select themselves for employment at Gravity. Within three years, Gravity’s pay structure will probably revert to industry standards, and Price’s minimum wage will be seen as a well-intended, but economically naïve, compensation plan.

Gilbert Gottfried Voices Our Favorite Games

Why Does 1% of History Have 99% of the Wealth?

scheherazade says...

That's true for a post industrial POV.
When machines already exist, and you just need energy to get things moving.

The energetic concerns of bygone eras were :
Whale oil, and later kerosene. For lighting. (note: back then, a day's work would only buy minutes of light)
Firewood, and later coal. For heating.
Manpower was the only energy user when it came to food production.

Early machines such as the combine were horse drawn, and did not need an energy architecture in place. (ignoring "food" as an energy)

Later machines used steam power, and hence could piggy back on the already existing wood/coal energy architecture (in turn stimulating it to grow larger).

Once the machinery industry was established, and the revenue generation was in place, it was possible to invest in improvements and alternative energies - ultimately leading up to oil burning machinery being common.

In any case, historically, industrialization drove the energy industry. (As it should, why have an industry to produce a product (energy) that isn't needed?)
And industrialization depended on a conducive society. A place where an inventor could own his invention, and could sell it, allowing things that were no more than ideas or garage trinkets to transition into products - which in turn place demand on other resources such as [forms of] energy.

In the past, there was nothing, so everything was build from the ground up. Industries grew out of nothing, they weren't established up front.
Modern times are different, where you have investment capital from entities who's entire existence revolves around investing, and you can front the establishment of an industry in the calculated hope of future demand.
(Granted, lords/aristocrats had a hand in industrial investment. Just not the kind or scale that you can see today.)

What you say applies a bit later, when industrialization was already well under way. Like when Thomas Edison used investment capital to fund power plants and an electrical network, in order to power the first [practical, but not 'first'] light bulb in New York.

-scheherazade

criticalthud said:

perhaps, but first things first. Economic policy is secondary to energetic concerns. Innovation is seriously impeded if a society is primarily worried about feeding itself. You don't innovate if u spend ur time digging in the dirt for primary needs. Agrarian societies require energetic resources to become industrial.
Once that is considered, then u can argue economic policies. Until then, it's seriously premature.

South African Goes For Tacos In Los Angeles

chingalera says...

MIddle-class?? Sounds more pretentious an entomology, most-likely French aristocratic-

FlowersInHisHair said:

No way. A paper towel is something you dry your hands with. A napkin is a small paper cloth given with fast food (like in this video). A serviette is what middle-class people call a napkin.

Queen Humiliates Obama During Toast

Yogi says...

I think it's funny when the White Monarch of a country known for subjugating Africans (and half the world) is still putting black people in their place. Even the most powerful man in the world isn't immune to this old cunt and her cunty aristocratic ways.

Seriously this bullshit needs to stop, sell off those fucking castles and send the queen packing. The British Monarchs are just as bad if not worse than Hitler, but England wrote the history so we gotta respect that shit? Fuck them.

deedub81 said:

That's awkward........ Doesn't he have someone on staff whose sole responsibility is protocol like this? Shouldn't he get a briefing/script when he meets with other heads of state?

She did say, "That's very kind." That was very gracious of Her Majesty the Queen.

True Facts About The Tapir - zefrank

Grossest Virginity Loss EVER!! - (*WARNING, NSFW Content*)

Shepppard says...

And then they all jump up and yell "The Aristocrats!"

poolcleaner said:

K, I read Tucker Max in college. There's a much more offensive and disgusting story about a girl's first anal experience where Tucker empties the entire bottle of lube up her butt while his friend is in a bedroom closet filming it.

Too much lube, it fires out like a lube-shit volcano, his friend vomits, stumbling out of the closest from the stench, and all three of them end up tangled up in the middle of a shit-lube comforter on the ground.

Prince Harry Runs for an Ice Cream

The Most Offensive Song Ever Written - (Very NSFW)

Awesome Ukrainian acrobat family



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon