I think the idea is that if you want 2 pp's, you either go charter or else you post some really popular vids. Now that gifting is a possibility, that's another way to get them.

The 2 pp's from deadpool mining for people who had their 2nd anniversary badge was an idea I support, but it got squashed after the protest by the don't limit our pp's brigade.

Yep, the PC brigade are running things. Yet we (men) still have "distractions" we are told we cannot comment on, or look at. A great line from a sit-com succinctly pinpoints our dilemma; Woman; "You're looking at my breasts." Man; "Oh, so you're wearing a low cut shirt so that I will notice your shoes?"

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by mintbbb.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by oritteropo. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

That was in the Eltham floods last Christmas, @Barseps posted it then.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Australian-Fire-Brigade-Truck-is-Full-Of-WIN

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by pumkinandstorm.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Australian-Fire-Brigade-Truck-is-Full-Of-WIN

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by ctrlaltbleach. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

>> ^renatojj:

@Kofi if 200 billion is not enough, wouldn't that amount increase if government didn't take away so much from it? If people were allowed to keep more of their money, I think they would have more to likely donate to charity.


Well if you look at "charity" breakdown, it's only about $35B that goes to anything like disaster relief.

So let's use that real number. And then let's pretend that it's not already spent on ongoing everyday problems, and then let's pretend the ~$60B in tax revenue that these "charities" are exempted from costs nothing.

Are you seriously claiming that you could put together a lean-mean non-profit relief org that could manage to be prepared for, and provide aid in any arbitrary situation like hurricane Sandy for $35B a year? What about the next thing? What if you go a Katrina instead?

>> ^renatojj:


Also, I'm sure you'll agree that just throwing money at a problem is not a solution, whether it's 200 billion or 2 trillion, the amount isn't everything. Just look at how much more money government takes and how poorly it does its job. Wouldn't charity, without the wasteful middle man of government, improve the situation?
Besides, wasting money is the opposite of charity, because it's money that won't go into productive employment, goods, services, and investments. So society is worse off, and while most of us can still go on with our lives, those who are needy and poor are the most affected by any amount of wasted resources.


Large Organizations are wasteful, if they are for-profit, charity, or government, having a large enough infrastructure to address large problems is costly, that is not a government problem.

We live in a high infrastructure technological society. We don't form bucket brigades when someone's house catches on fire, we have professionals, with effective equipment, who show up and solve this problem more quickly and efficiently, and at a lower aggregate cost to society.

The same is true of disaster relief, we pay for the maintenance of a professional disaster relief infrastructure, and it's cheaper than either doing it ad-hoc, or not having anything in place at all.

Kindness and charity are good and real human impulses, but they are not preparedness, we have organizations for that, we call them governments.

thanks for the promote
In reply to this comment by eric3579:
*promote

So the fire brigade uses what appears to be a wooden ladder.

She falls into a 6 meter hole, so over 18 feet deep....an 18 foot wooden ladder.

Yay, thank you!

In reply to this comment by Barseps:
Bit of a long response, but I REALLY have something to say here. Two performing artists from the 1980's stuck out in my mind because I always figured that the 2nd song they released was W-A-Y better than their first. This song was indeed JHJ's first single, but the next song they released struck a chord with me because it had a humanitarian feel to it....the cynic in me says it didn't do too well 'cos the PC brigade didn't want a clean-cut band singing a song that tipped a hat to prostitutes .... but, ho hum.

"Pure Heart Of Gold" - (Johnny Hates Jazz)


Artist number two was a guy called Rupert Holmes, he was most famously known for the "Pina Colada" song, but his 2nd release (which was ALSO a song about cheating within a relationship) just seemed to get to the heart of the matter that bit more & was a better song in my book.

"Him" - (Rupert Holmes)


If I'd known this post was in Beggar's Canyon, it wouldn't have been there for very long, I can tell you that much. Thanks for the trip down memory lane @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/mintbbb" title="member since April 30th, 2008" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#00d9ff">mintbbb

^Upvoted^
*History
*Quality
& if you're looking for me I'll be browsing "Beggar's Canyon"

Bit of a long response, but I REALLY have something to say here. Two performing artists from the 1980's stuck out in my mind because I always figured that the 2nd song they released was W-A-Y better than their first. This song was indeed JHJ's first single, but the next song they released struck a chord with me because it had a humanitarian feel to it....the cynic in me says it didn't do too well 'cos the PC brigade didn't want a clean-cut band singing a song that tipped a hat to prostitutes .... but, ho hum.

"Pure Heart Of Gold" - (Johnny Hates Jazz)


Artist number two was a guy called Rupert Holmes, he was most famously known for the "Pina Colada" song, but his 2nd release (which was ALSO a song about cheating within a relationship) just seemed to get to the heart of the matter that bit more & was a better song in my book.

"Him" - (Rupert Holmes)


If I'd known this post was in Beggar's Canyon, it wouldn't have been there for very long, I can tell you that much. Thanks for the trip down memory lane @mintbbb

^Upvoted^
*History
*Quality
& if you're looking for me I'll be browsing "Beggar's Canyon"

Awesome the United Citizens Brigade is still around. They had a stint on Comedy Central for a while and I saw one of their live performances in NYC!

I think we've discussed on several threads now how Paul would endorse a society that openly tolerates racial discrimination. In the context of everything he has done to support and encourage racism, even if he claims to be an angel, the newsletters are very relevant.>> ^quantumushroom:

@NetRunner
Unfortunately for Dr. Paul, no matter how he explains (or fails to explain) liberal accusations of being a racist, he can't win.
Paul has said his aides told him he has to take responsibility for the newsletters' content, whether or not only "a few" statements were terrible, and whether or not he was the author (it's generally conceded he was not, but as you and others will readily point out, his name was in big letters on the top and he was the publisher).
The problem with labeling anyone a racist is that in 2012 it's the equivalent of crying wolf. It's so overused as to be meaningless. In Dr. Paul's case, because the drive-by media refuse to do their damned jobs, you get jabs like this:
RoPaul voted AGAINST awarding Rosa Parks a Congressional Gold Medal! OMG RACISM!
No one bothers to note that Paul also 'opposed giving the medal to Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II as well, so it doesn’t appear race had anything to do with his stance.
'Paul has generally applauded lawmakers for wanting to issue the Gold Medal, but he insists they should put up their own money instead of asking taxpayers to foot the bill, which typically runs about $30,000 for each award.'
What I'm saying in too many words is that the entire anti-Paul/anti-libertarian brigade is howling about an ace hidden in Dr. Paul's sleeve, while every game in their casino is rigged.
You say whether Obama, Wright and you (and/or me) are racist has no bearing on whether Paul is racist. Well, if we're ALL 'racist' then what does it matter?
We're looking for a President, not a saint. LBJ was crazier than a sh1thouse rat, but to the left he was some kind of hero for pushing the Civil Rights Act. Yet LBJ is also quoted as saying "I'll have those n gg rs voting Democratic for the next 200 years."
I didn't go looking for Dr. Paul's writing on the moral evils of discrimination. As he is a believer in individual rights (and responsibility) I don't see how he could be either an overt or closet racist to the extent you're describing. He's against Drug Prohibition, which is inherently racist, and more questionably, against "wars" because minorities, according to him, have it harder in the military.
Our common framework is you're going to find plenty of dirt to dislike him, and peeps like me will see enough good in him to atone for any misgivings, despite Paul's wacky, totally unrealistic worldview where we recall ALL our troops from all over the world (allowing red china to easily take over). Again, we're electing a ripe-for-corruption American President, not a saint.