search results matching tag: oxford

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (85)     Sift Talk (5)     Blogs (2)     Comments (125)   

Ducks : And How To Make Them Pay

GDP down for 2nd quarter. America is in a recession.

bobknight33 says...

Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford

a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters.


IF only the other fake news would step up to the plate.

Mean Tweets – Avengers Edition

newtboy says...

Confusing may have been a poor choice of words.....conflating?

It seems to me that your definition is actually mired in your philosophy, not reality, since every dictionary available disagrees with your definition.

Of course you're welcome to speak as you please, but if we can't even agree on the definitions of words, we'll have little chance of making progress, imo. I'll stick with Mirriam-Webster's and Oxford over personal preference.

Discussions often move away from the video topic. Is that something that calls for apologies? If so, I owe the sift dozens of them.

Payback said:

Fair point.

Not that I'm confused, it's just I guess my definition of racism is mired in reality, rather than philosophy.

I apologize to the rest of the Sift for continuing on this thread. It's really off the rails from the video content.

gramar explaned | exurb1a

ChaosEngine jokingly says...

No, but I'm wearing one made from Titanium right now.

There's also Helium, Lithium, Beryllium, Sodium, Magnesium, Potassium, Calcium, Scandium, Vanadium, Chromium, Gallium, Germanium, Selenium, Rubidium, Strontium, Yttrium, Zirconium, Niobium, Technetium, Ruthenium, Rhodium, Palladium, Cadmium, Indium, Tellurium, Caesium, Barium, Hafnium, Rhenium, Osmium, Iridium, Thallium, Polonium, Francium, Radium, Actinium, Rutherfordium, Dubnium, Seaborgium, Bohrium, Hassium, Meitnerium, Darmstadtium, Roentgenium, Copernicium, Nihonium, Flerovium, Moscovium, Livermorium, Cerium, Praseodymium, Neodymium, Promethium, Samarium, Europium, Gadolinium, Terbium, Dysprosium, Holmium, Erbium, Thulium, Ytterbium, Lutetium, Thorium, Protactinium, Uranium, Neptunium, Plutonium, Americium, Curium, Berkelium, Californium, Einsteinium, Fermium, Mendelevium, Nobelium,* and Lawrencium.

* oxford comma for life!

TheFreak said:

Aluminum or aluminium?

I don't know, would wear a ring made out of platinium?

Skinny Lister - This Is War

Skinny Lister: NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert

Skinny Lister - Rollin' Over - CARDINAL SESSIONS

Skinny Lister & Beans On Toast - This Christmas

Seth Meyers on Orlando and Trump

harlequinn says...

I already defined bigoted farther up the thread.

But again, back to the Oxford:

Bigot: A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
Bigotry: Intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Even dictionary.com gets it right this time. I don't know where you got your definition of "bigot".

1) It wasn't any of those though.
2) It wasn't bigoted innuendo though.
3) Not wanting to allow radicalised muslims who will engage in criminal behaviour into your country (which is what this is about) is not bigoted (just as you aren't considered bigoted for not wanting criminals engaging in criminal behaviour in the community). Making a temporary ban until you can institute a more rigorous vetting process is not bigoted. I.e. he accepts non-radicalised Muslims and their views, but they will have temporary visa restrictions until a better vetting system is in place.
4) Assuming the worst about a group is not bigotry. Being intolerant of the group's views is.

No, since they aren't bigotry, they couldn't be used as examples in a dictionary.

Saying disparaging things about a group is not bigotry. E.g. someone could say "I fucking hate Australians, they suck". That's not bigotry. Or, "All Australian's are dicks". Also not bigotry. Now on the other hand if they said, "I don't accept the views or opinions of Australians", then that is bigotry.

newtboy said:

In response to your response.....the definition....
Bigotry-intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
Bigot-a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

1) It is bigotry if they're revoked based on race, religion, sexual preference, difference of opinion, or any other groupings.
2) It is if it's bigoted innuendo.
3) Not wanting to allow Muslims (specifically Middle Eastern Muslims) into your country because you unfairly purport that they're all radical Islamists is bigotry.
4) Assuming the worst about Muslims as a group is bigotry.

It's a bit funny, because all the things you mentioned could be listed as examples of bigotry in the dictionary.

If he's wrong, and he knows it, about something disparaging he said about some group, that's a "bigoted lie".

As for the Supreme Court nomination (not appointment), you are technically correct with your statement, but not your meaning, his "litmus test" for acceptable nominees would be bigoted if it starts with "they must revoke the rights of [group X that I disagree with so doesn't deserve equal rights]".

Ken Burns slams Trump in Stanford Commencement

harlequinn says...

He's a billionaire. Traditionally speaking society at large accepts that people with incredible wealth are powerful.

If he's elected then by definition no force is needed and he doesn't need to try and seize the reigns. He's the president. He has a lot of parliamentary power. The reigns are handed to him on a silver platter. That said, he's still got congress to deal with, and if it's a hostile congress then he could be pushing shit up a hill.

Thank you for your fascism elucidation. I disagree that system will happen if he is elected. It's almost fanciful.

I don't believe Clinton has been charged or convicted. That's why I said she's "innocent until proven guilty".

No, not satisfied. I'd need to see links to court outcomes. But I'm not that interested so don't bother on my behalf.

As per the Oxford Dictionary the common use of naive is: showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgement. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/naive

Dictionary.com doesn't cut it for me

newtboy said:

True, no one KNOWS, but it's a no brainer that his election would be seen as unpredictable by the markets, and dire political unpredictability=bear market.

Not so in any way. He has so little actual power it's laughable that you would think that. He's not even allowed to run the companies he actually owns large parts of because the boards won't allow him to, because they have a duty to not let him drive the companies into the ground. What "power" do you think he has?

He probably can't "seize the reigns" by force unless he's elected. He can attempt to seize them if he is elected.

Facism-(sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Has Clinton been convicted? You didn't even say "likely broken Federal law", you said "on more occasions than is accountable, broken Federal Law" Because his past has not been as transparent by far and usually those dealing with him are forced to sign non disclosure agreements, it's patently ridiculous to imply that his crimes would be simple to just point to....but OK, not paying off on interstate contracts is a federal crime, one he's admitted publicly that he's committed uncountable times, any time he gets service before payment in full it seems....and he's been found guilty of that in civil court. Satisfied?

Um...lacking knowledge is being naïve.
Naïve-having or showing a lack of experience, judgment, or information; credulous:

Trigger Warnings Let Students Skip Lectures

Imagoamin says...

"Letting them know that you're about to have a lecture on very sensitive material is totally fine. I mean, I've done that."

Then congrats, you're OK with trigger warnings.

And like most instances where people panic about them, Oxford hasn't made any sort of official policy. Professors are able to do so at will or ignore the use of the warnings all together. Much like they have been doing for years and years.

Curious how victims of sexual assault that often develop PTSD for periods following are somehow "coddled censors", yet the same doesn't apply for any sort of accommodation for other mental or physical ailments. We don't see people freaking out about warnings of flashing lights in various media for the epileptic, we don't mock the soldier suffering from PTSD who asks for accommodations, and we don't mock the migraine sufferers who avoid certain situations, food, etc to prevent attacks.

But somehow, the physical effects triggered by certain stimuli of a lingering sexual assault is different. Better alert the news media, the PC police rape survivors are here to ruin everything with their asks for "Hey, maybe consider my physical issues?"

Fox Guest So Vile & Sexist Even Hannity Cringes

ChaosEngine says...

I never said you can't oppose institutional rape. That was a counter-example to your "history wasn't universally sexist" point. I thought that was pretty clear.

I'll concede that sexism wasn't universal, but nothing is, so that's a completely meaningless point. I was illustrating that history in general has been pretty fucking awful to women.

As for that definition, it's not mine. I actually looked it up before I used it to make sure I wasn't using it incorrectly.

"the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities"
- Merriam Webster
"The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes."
- Oxford
"Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women"
- Wikipedia
Do I need to go on?

And yes, the concept has been around for ages. Support for the concept is relatively recent and has brought great change.

gorillaman said:

@ChaosEngine

Do you honestly believe that we can't oppose things like institutional rape without reference to this single recent ideology? This is equivalent with the idea that humanity only learned theft and murder were wrong when Moses turned up waving the ten commandments at the israelites. It's lucky God clued us in when he did or we'd all still be unabashedly robbing and killing each other today.

Feminists might use the definition you mentioned, when it suits them. Of course they do; they're the popular faction: ideologues always want to fold all notions of moral goodness into their particular cult. Catholicism was the same way when they were the only game in town.

You yourself don't even use that definition, you can't because no one can. Look at the first couple of comments you made on this video. It's impossible to read them as dealing with a basic concept rather than what feminism actually is, which is a complex modern movement that certainly postdates the suffragettes.

If feminism is strictly the concept of equality for women, then feminism has been around FOREVER and until in historical terms about five minutes ago, according to you, 'didn't have any noticeable effect'.

newtboy (Member Profile)

Syntaxed says...

I must admit a certain amount of general amusement in speaking with you, I do love a good solid rant. It brings a unique air of difference into my otherwise droll existence.

You examined your post and found no sign of vulgar language, even abbreviated?


Definition of vulgar in English(Taken from the English Oxford Dictionary)
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/vulgar

adjective
1Lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined:

I am speaking to someone who doesn't even know the language he is speaking, you see my amusement?

I cant help it if your general ignorance seeps into every pore of your conscious existence, and I must admit it should be above me(or anyone, for that matter), to aggravate someone of such an argy-bargy disposition. However, maybe someday the light-bulb will turn on inside your head, and you might finally see past the world you've been spoon-fed since birth.

Good day:)

newtboy said:

Face=>Palm

So, you quote the same hyper partisan types of 'media' Fox uses and claim to not know about Fox at all...oh really. That's an impressive blindness to a political giant not only here, but in your country as well.

Yes, red herring. I'm not bothering with your over abundance of partisan right wing sites, but the one I did randomly check said almost exactly what I said, that they had found NOTHING illegal and probably could never prosecute even if they did because they could not prove she knew it was illegal, but more likely what she did wasn't illegal or improper at the time she emailed from/to her private server. I'm sure the rest told you what you say they did read in the right light...but you don't understand it's all BS. How do I know? No charges. If/when they ever found anything substantive, there will be charges pending the next day and republicans on every channel dancing a jig. Since there aren't, I know there's nothing there.

Your smattering of anti-socialist sites mean nothing. No one said socialism was perfect, just that it's part of society and railing against any instance you can identify is just plain silly. Too much socialism without incentive for production is never a good idea...but none at all is Mad Max, where your precious degree won't be helping save you from the gas boys.

Again, more crazed right wing articles making claims against the ACA mean...what? Nothing. It's survived every challenge so far, and hundreds of attempts to repeal it. It's alive and well, contrary to what you've apparently read. It could certainly be better, but obstructionists would have nothing of 'single payer' and many states have done all they can to sabotage it.

Now for Trump...not a single one of those ideas is anything more than laughable.
1. Good luck with just 'not letting any more in'. You'll need to put the entire army on the borders, and the navy off shore to even come close. Won't happen in any way. The borders and shores are too large to patrol or wall off, much less both.
2. What free Federal resources do you think exist that can round up 11 million people and move them across a border? They don't exist, and would cost the entire GDP to try if it went smoothly...and it wouldn't. And it ignores the millions of legal children left behind which would cost billions-trillions more to take care of poorly. It's just laughable.
3. Smile because you just ate a tasty turd Trump told you was the best, most luxurious chocolate mousse.
Uncontrolled immigration is an issue, but not one easily solved, certainly not with his outrageously expensive plans.

Mexico building a wall because we illegally stop trading with them? (we have a binding trade agreement that precludes any such thing by law) You've got to be kidding. First, can't and won't ever happen, it would cost us trillions to replace/lose the products and trade that come from Mexico, if we could. Second, as I mentioned, illegal. Third, what happens when other nations side with Mexico, who's being illegally and outrageously bullied and blackmailed by the US, and stop trade with us too...like China? The plan is incredibly short sighted and given no thought at all, he just assumes that if we push, they'll all lie down and cry uncle. That's not how the world works.

You claim to have a degree and work for a bank, but you have at least twice tried to pin the entire debt on Obama. Perhaps you don't understand that the debt was about 12 trillion when he took office with the economy in the toilet thanks to the kinds of ideas you support? Our last president, a "conservative" far more than doubled the debt, and took a budget surplus and made it a HUGE deficit (source-https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm) and those numbers were while keeping two wars 'off the books' that are now being paid for. EDIT: and Obama has taken an enormous deficit and shrunk it precipitously while also turning the economy around...the right way (yeah, the last pres. turned it around too) Don't get it twisted...I'm pretty disappointed in Obama, I was from the first term, but because he didn't go much farther, not because of what he did get done.

Trump's the Republican second place runner...among republicans willing to answer presidential poll questions a year before the election. He's completely toast in a general election, even if he managed to get the other 76+% of republicans to vote for him (hint...he won't), he won't get any independents.

Vulgar language?!? I re-read my entire post, and not a single vulgar word IMO. One abbreviation of a vulgar word. You have GOT to be kidding me about that. If not, wow...get off the internet NOW and never come back, it's SO not for you. ;-)

oritteropo (Member Profile)

radx says...

Haven't seen this one in circulation yet:

Dear Chancellor Merkel,

The never-ending austerity that Europe is force-feeding the Greek people is simply not working. Now Greece has loudly said no more.

As most of the world knew it would, austerity has crushed the Greek economy, led to mass unemployment, a collapse of the banking system, made the external debt crisis far worse, with the debt problem escalating to an unpayable 175% of GDP. The economy now lies broken with tax receipts nose-diving, output and employment depressed, and businesses starved of capital.

The humanitarian impact has been colossal – 40% of children now live in poverty, infant mortality is sky-rocketing and youth unemployment is close to 50%. Corruption, tax evasion and bad accounting by previous Greek governments helped create the debt problem. But the series of so-called adjustment programs has served only to make a Great Depression the likes of which have been unseen in Europe since 1929-1933. The medicine prescribed by the German Finance Ministry and Brussels has bled the patient, not cured the disease.

Together we urge you to lead Europe to a course correction before it is too late for Greece and for the Eurozone. Right now, the Greek government is being asked to put a gun to its head and pull the trigger. Sadly, the bullet will not only kill off Greece’s future in Europe. The collateral damage will kill the Eurozone as a beacon of hope, prosperity, and democracy, and could lead to far-reaching economic consequences across the world.

In the 1950s Europe was founded on the forgiveness of past debts, notably Germany’s, which generated a massive contribution to post-war economic growth, peace, and democracy. Today we need to restructure and reduce Greek debt, give the economy breathing room to recover, and allow Greece to pay off a reduced burden of debt over a long period of time. Now is the time for a humane rethink of the punitive and failed programme of austerity of recent years and to agree to a major reduction of Greece’s debts in conjunction with much needed reforms in Greece.

We urge you to take this vital action of leadership for Greece and Germany, and also for the world. History will remember you for your actions this week. We expect and count on you to provide the bold and generous steps towards Greece that will serve Europe for generations to come.

Yours sincerely,

Heiner Flassbeck, former State Secretary in the German Federal Ministry of Finance;

Thomas Piketty, Professor of Economics at the Paris School of Economics;

Jeffrey D. Sachs, Professor of Sustainable Development, Professor of Health Policy and Management, and Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University;

Dani Rodrik, Albert O. Hirschman Professor of Social Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton;

Simon Wren-Lewis, Professor of economics, Blavatnik School of Government, Oxford University

Real Time - New Rule – Learn How to Take a Joke

MilkmanDan says...

Actually, the (wikipedia) link in my first comment says that the phrase "call a spade a spade" was created from a (mis)translation of ancient Greek. The original Greek apparently said "calling a fig a fig, and a trough a trough", but the trough became a spade (shovel) and the fig got dropped.

The word "spade" by itself being used as a slur probably does come from playing cards ("black as the ace of spades"). Wikipedia says that (racist) definition was first included in the Oxford English Dictionary in 1928.

I guess that "call a spade a spade" fell out of popularity a bit because people were concerned that it might be assumed that the use of "spade" was meant in a racist way, even though it wasn't originally. But now I think maybe most people don't know the usage of "spade" as a slur, so the other phrase is becoming more acceptable again? I had never heard "spade" used as a slur before talking to a friend from the UK.


...And even though I'm OK with "call a spade a spade", or even a lot of the more blatant pushing the limits that comedians like Seinfeld, Chris Rock, etc. do, I do think that there is a point where you have to realize you're just asking for trouble. I remember a while back, some politician got into hot water for (technically correctly) using the word "niggardly" to mean "stingy" or "cheap". That *is* correct usage, and the origin is entirely disconnected from the similar-sounding slur.

BUT, you pretty much *have* to expect that people are going to jump to the other conclusion, so I think it is reasonable/best for people under public scrutiny (politicians, etc.) to avoid the word. On the other hand, if Seinfeld or Chris Rock wanted to work that into a bit that exposed our ignorance of the correct/original definition for comedic effect, I think that would be a good thing. And potentially funny.

Sagemind said:

I actually had no idea this was used as a racial slur.
Spade a spade... I assumed playing cards or something...
(Shrugs)



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