haha..whats up drunky!
you nailed exactly why i post some of the more controversial videos in my que.

i have found that those of identify strongly with one politcial and/or cultural philosophy tend to stick in the same groups,the same spaces and receive their information from the same sources.

this applies to both the right AND the left.
we can use bobknight as an example when he regurgitates almost verbatim the current republican talking points.

but bob is an easy target.

the only thing i have truly been invested in of late is the greg elliot case.who was recently found not guilty and people have been saying its a victory for free speech.

but is it?
the man lost his job and is 100k in the hole for legal fees.

so while people can say this is a victory for free speech.i am less optimistic.some people could look at greg elliots case and decide to shut up if confronted.not make any waves and submit to the threat of legal prosecution.

of course there was a sifter who felt that because the video was from a right wing show,the content was worthless.which is a binary way of thinking that is very limiting,because it judges the speaker before the content and the discussion is ended before it has begun.

so my posting the rape game video was to bring awareness,not make a social commentary,and is also why i provided links to both a left and right take on the situation.

i would rather post a documentary or lecture on the subject,but most people nowadays want their information spoon fed to them in tiny,easy to consume,media bites no more than 5 minutes.

which is damn near impossible.
human interactions,cultures,religions and societies are complex and nuanced.it takes time to unpack all that information and digest the context.

ah well..what can you do...

anyways,
thanks for your comment and stay awesome brother!

UFC commentary would be most appropriate here.

@radx @enoch @eric3579

For one thing, give the executive or legislative power over the printing press in a crisis and they will not willingly give that power up and end up abusing it. For another, if you're simply printing money to spend then you depreciate and inflate your currency commensurately, at least in the long term. Relying heavily on this is the kind of thing that Venezuela does. There's a reason that governments instead take on their fiscal spending as debt. On that I would say, I've also become much more skeptical of fiscal stimulus in general but particularly in corrections or recessions. I'm okay with automatic stabilizers (unemployment benefits, the largely limitless kind with strings attached we have here in Australia) but not so much direct fiscal stimulus.

The fundamental issue to me is large, even extremely large fiscal spending will not affect business confidence levels of economic conditions. There is some fiscal multiplier effects (the multiple of the effect on national income over the spending injection by the government) but the worse economic conditions are, the lower this will be. Also, yes with say infrastructure spending, you're creating immediate jobs. Problem is these are in no way permanent jobs and simply pushes the can down the road on them finding new employment. Better to provide unemployment benefits and training to get them into a more permanent job faster.

Also large bouts of spending (again to use infrastructure as an example) tends to be hugely wasteful. Good projects require appraisals, consultation and careful planning. The notion of handfuls of 'shovel ready' projects is a political myth. You can instead span it out but then you don't get the mooted fiscal boost. In fact I would argue infrastructure spending is never appropriate as fiscal stimulus. It should be in a constant, planned process of improvement irrespective of business cycles or downturns. The US stimulus under Obama was largely long term spending projects like this as giveaways to the states. There is little evidence it eased the recovery or altered behaviour though. Many states simply enacted the same civic projects they would have otherwise and used this money instead of issuing debt like they would have otherwise - effectively they saved on interest.

So what are the alternatives then? The government here in Australia also heavily spent on roads, home subsidies and schools but notably also gave all income earners a cash deposit of AUD $300-950. The latter is probably the closest you can get to a pure fiscal stimulus - immediately cash to spend, injected not into banks than might save it but given particularly to low / medium income earners most likely to spend it. Again what we saw is that it hardly altered consumer / household behaviour. Many saved it, many spent it on large one off purchases (e.g. TVs, in which case most of that value was transferred overseas). So we gave a dollop of cash as stimulus to the global economy of which Australia is a drop in the ocean. Basically my attitude is, if you maintain good infrastructure, effective education systems, adequate but efficient regulation, reasonable tax rates, and importantly competitive markets, the best way to get through a crisis is to let the market stabilize by itself. Provide assistance and retraining to workers who lose their jobs by all means, but don't expect government spending to be some kind of savior.

I agree on the inflation aspect of your post. There were certainly no shortage of self-declared monetarists buying up gold in anticipation of high inflation, but as you say dollops of cash in the economy are meaningless if they are idle and the economy under capacity. The question now with unemployment in the US at 5.5% whether capacity is finally pushing LRAS levels. Probably not, participation rate is low and falling, and the unemployment rate is woefully underrepresenting forced part timers. Also as you mention the dip in oil will temper prices on the input cost side. The Fed certainly seems to think so and has started tightening rates but as so much commentary in the investing world is saying, this may turn out to be a mistake and they may end up having to reverse course.

It would appear the SJW's got the original video pulled from youtube. I guess if you can't win an discussion it's better to delete the evidence.

*backup=[...snipped...]

This is another video that covers the same thing sans commentary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd4kX66uG1M

@ChaosEngine She raises her fist? Take a step back.

Put up your hand in a "stop" motion and say loudly and firmly "NO."

It's that simple. That difficult.

I don't expect perfection from humans in the moment. We have have limitations. But the commentary afterwards?

It. Is. Not. Okay. To. Hit.

He had options. He didn't take them.

Thanks

It was so nicely done that it really didn't need any further commentary.

always liked Anna, but who's this other lady on the panel?
pretty useless commentary by her, IMHO.

Does Cenk never do his own show anymore? Why is it still called TYT?

What irritates me the most is product placement on news sites.

With everyone using AdBlock I can imagine they're struggling for revenue, but it's frustrating when you see say tech sites previously with good editorial commentary running "XX releases new product" every second post which all read like a press release. Or "xmas gift ideas" articles that are pretty much glossy ad inserts.

This video has a lot of votes but no commentary. These guys are probably assholes, but already it is known that a more than likely government agent posed as Bundy on Twitter as a racist fucktwat. Maybe Bundy is a racist asshole but what I see is government induced propaganda introduced in order to help people to let go of the topic of taking the government head on, or maybe I've just watched too much of Making a Murderer. It's the exact same shit. Fuck the FBI. Fuck the police. Fuck the courts. Fuck the brainless citizens/jurors that eat the propaganda like a quarter pounder with cheese and a late day sausage mcmuffin. cuntz. Colbert is a sellout.

I liked the video better than the commentary.

I feel bad for the teacher...it feels like he is stuck (doesn't walk away)

I don't really understand this newfangled social justice warrior. I am just glad I missed it. It is always the self-important people that cause the most drama. They think they are so important.

The snap is just weird. No one questions it. This is how we clap now.

Jesus @enoch, I get that you're annoyed by feminists at the moment, but fuck me, surely you can find some videos that aren't narrated by complete oxygen thieves?

Look, here's the actual video of the protest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0

No commentary is needed.

Wow...I'd seen all the headlines about this, purposefully avoided most Star Wars commentary as it seems pretty weakly considered and nearly always click-bait.

Seems like the "white slavers" comment wasn't anything as serious as the hype-mill spun it. It's almost a throwaway joke that you can tell doesn't really land. I think Lucas seems humble and wise in this clip.

@eoe
jesus christ dude..
could you be any more presumptuous?

first off,i didnt call you out specifically.
i rather enjoyed you and newts exchange,but my commentary was not addressing nor interjecting in that conversation.

second,the only argument (if you even want to call it that) that i proposed was to cut the moral absolutes out,because they are bullshit.

now maybe you do not engage in the morality argument that many ..MANY ...vegans DO attempt to utilize to better make their point,and hats off to you if you see the hypocrisy of such a tactic.

now please understand i am not ignoring that there is a morality factor in being a vegan and i totally respect that.what i am stating is to not become burdened with absolutes and attempting to use morality to further a position..or you will be called out on it and rightly so.

thirdly,
your comment is actually a straw man,not mine.
you posit a position i didnt take in order to refute that imaginary position.

which you took a step further by accusing me of not addressing certain aspects of an argument that i only tacitly referred to and in no specific or detailed way.

in fact almost your entire comment towards me is a fabricated argument that i never had with you.

so who are you arguing/debating with?
because i can say with some authority that it is not me.

maybe you took my tone or words as a direct assault on you or what you have written,but as anybody here will attest,i have no problem calling someone out directly.conversely,i have no problem being called out (if my fly is open,please let me know).

so if that is the case,allow me to offer an olive branch:
my girlfriend of many years is a devout vegan.
so i am full aware of the reasons why she became a vegan (at the tender age of seven,no shit) and for her the decision was mostly a moral one i.e:cruelty,abuse etc etc.

when we first started dating she attempted to use every tactic in the book to get me to see the barbarity in my callous and cruel meat eating ways.she would send me videos of the most horrific abuse of animals,slaughterhouse horror stories..i am sure you may be familiar with many of her tactics in attempting to reveal the moral imperative to stop this torture and abuse.

which i responded (much like alluded to in my original comment) by showing her videos of the horrific abuses perpetrated upon human beings just so she could have cheap clothing and those electronic gadgets she loves so much.

which of course made her feel absolute,crushing guilt.almost to the point where it paralyzed her.because she is an adorable sweetheart who genuinely cares for not only people but animals.

which leads me to the main point i was making:
you cannot make a vegan argument based solely on moral absolutes,because it will fall apart within seconds and you come across as a pretentious twat.

so YOU can make the decision to be a vegan based on moral grounds and that is totally acceptable,but you cannot take the moral high ground when debating veganism to further a point,because we ALL bear responsibility in the suffering of others.be they animal or human.

do you see what i am saying?

if you choose to indulge moral absolutes,then you will be exposed as a hypocrite,because when we use absolutes,that metric has to be applied equally to all factors of living.

which leaves us with the "distinctions" and the reason i say those are boring is because it becomes a narcissistic exercise of self-righteous twattery.

i recycle.
i refuse to shop at walmart.
i do not eat fast food.
i only buy organic.
i try to shop local.

all these things i do,not because they actually make a difference,but rather they make me feel better about myself.it gives me the "feel goods".even though i am full aware that in the larger picture,what i am doing means next to nothing.

but it means something to me.
and i think that is really the only real argument a vegan has to rely on to express their viewpoint.

i have seen the videos.
i am aware how awful,cruel and barbaric farming animals can be,but i like bacon.

i am an asshole.

Your video, Ozzie Commentary of an Indecisive Lioness Kill, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 6 Badge!

@coolhund
dude..chill.
while i totally respect and admire your passion,@dingens is correct in pointing out your ad-hom swipe.you made overly broad assumptions about him with zero evidence to back those assumptions up,at least on this thread there is no evidence.

i think you owe him an apology.

you appear,to me anyways,to be taking any opinions or criticisms as a personal attack upon you and your stance.

i do not really see people disagreeing with you,but rather pointing out the complex dynamics.this does not equate to disagreement,just a desire to refine the parameters of the discussion.

i totally get what you are trying to say and i agree with you,but in your (understandable) frustration you are lashing out at people who do not deserve your ire.

you are correct to point out that the elephant in the room is never questioned,never mind discussed.i.e:america creates the situation,then plays the victim.

which is your basic hegelian dialectic:problem-reaction-solution.

the real discussion is POWER vs POWERLESSNESS,and the abuses of power to the detriment of society,locally and globally.

at least thats how i was reading your commentary.i could have it all wrong but i do admire your passion.

if i could offer some unsolicited advice my friend:do not become so invested in your passions that you forget the plot.the people who have commented here are not your enemies.

they are just commenting,and maybe if you feel they are not understanding what you are laying down..clarify your position by engaging with these people to collectively formulate a better understanding.no need or reason to lash out at them,because maybe they just misunderstood what you were trying to say.

oh god...just realized i am that uncle on the holidays that tries to keep the peace by getting everyone drunk.

ok everybody!
beers on me!
lets go get drunk!