search results matching tag: nip

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (41)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (1)     Comments (163)   

Infectious Disease Expert on the seriousness of Coronavirus

bobknight33 says...

The rate of spread (Ro) is said to be between 2.5 and 4.

That is the same as saying X to power of 2.5 or 4.


Would be best to shut down any County that is infected. Nip it in the bud.

The infected guy in NC last week got it from Washington state old folks home, Now we have7 official cases and nest week we should be 20+

If we can slow down the rate of spread then the Hospitals can deal with this more effectively. I think this wont happen and facilities will be over burden is short order.


On the bright side this burn through the world in few months.
Hope we all are stand standing then.

Diversity and inclusion meeting ... at Michigan school

newtboy says...

Potential.
Historically; freedoms, rights, and opportunities, both economic and social.
Until recently, governmental system.
Wealth (per capita).
Military might (although I accept the argument that this is more often a net loss, not a net gain).

Yes, it swings both ways, as you also have the freedom to be as terrible as you like, to hate as irrationally as you like, to be as ignorant and dumb as you like, to be as spiteful and self serving as you like. Before we allowed our system to be purchased by the deepest pockets for purely personal gains of the powerful few with Citizens United, our system was well designed to serve the people, which while imperfect was still better than almost all others. There is still the possibility, however slight, that that democracy killing decision can be remedied with an amendment and we can get back on the right track. Most other systems are lacking in such self correction.

I'm not claiming perfection, far from it, but our overall potential outweighs any other nation's (at least it used to). Yes, we have bigots, but less than many nations by far. Some countries still allow murder of improper worshippers or don't allow certain races to become citizens.
Yes, we have more than our share of loudmouth ignorant morons, but there are other nations that beat us there too. We (as a whole) don't believe aids comes from homosexuals eating each other's poop, for instance, or that women's brains are 1/2 the size of men's. The opportunities for educational advancements are better here than most countries, but not all I admit, and far too many don't avail themselves of said opportunities, granted.
Yes, we have poor people, but fewer per capita than many if not most others, and the opportunity for ethical advancement both financial and social are still good, but admittedly that's changing.
Equality under the law, while far from perfection in that respect, we are (or were) still moving in the right direction.

We have a long hard Sisyphusian slog towards perfection, but overall, historically, we have been crawling towards justice more than away.

That said, New Zealand has been nipping at our heels for a while, and arguments could be made that they presently are ahead in all meaningful ways besides size and weather.

bremnet said:

Sorry, you lost me at "greatest country in the world", or at the very least your list of "despite it being..." is way, way too short. Greatest at or greatest for what? Bigots per capita? Most frequent demonstrations of unsubstantiated entitlement and negative IQ's?

60 teens vandalizing and looting Walgreens

BSR says...

1) Everyone makes mistakes. When the error of their ways is exposed they may change or they may put a gun to their head. Only they can judge themselves.

2) Keep denouncing as long as you can. You will need to know how strong you were.

3) Nipping it in the bud every single time will be a waste of time. When the house is on fire and people are jumping, you need to be there to catch them just as they will be there to catch you.

4) No need to judge. Give as little or as much as you like without terms or conditions. They know better than you what they need.

newtboy said:

Speaking up does not do nothing.

1) Sometimes reasonable people make mistakes, and when shown the error of their ways, they change.

2) This is not the case here. Here, a race baiting video is posted by someone with a clear history of racist posts, thoughts, language, and who gives other racists his full support. That must be denounced strongly or others who are like minded or just ignorant might feel emboldened to repeat the racism....as Bob did, repeating the racist comments from YouTube, thinking the sarcasm button shields him from repercussions.

3) What does nothing is remaining silent or worse, defending the thinly veiled racism. Both of those actions, like ignoring measles or kudzu, allows it to spread and gain traction elsewhere until it's intractable. Nip it in the bud every single time is the only method that helps.


4) Btw, imo it's a better plan to find that homeless person and buy them a meal, or socks. Take them in a store (or restaurant if they're presentable enough to not bother other patrons), let them buy what they want or need, and pay for it. Yes, you have to interact with them longer and not just drop a bill to feel good about yourself, but the results are much better, and your gift won't be stolen by others or used for drugs. Those just looking for drug money will usually refuse the offer in my experience.

60 teens vandalizing and looting Walgreens

newtboy says...

Speaking up does not do nothing.

Sometimes reasonable people make mistakes, and when shown the error of their ways, they change.

This is not the case here. Here, a race baiting video is posted by someone with a clear history of racist posts, thoughts, language, and who gives other racists his full support. That must be denounced strongly or others who are like minded or just ignorant might feel emboldened to repeat the racism....as Bob did, repeating the racist comments from YouTube, thinking the sarcasm button shields him from repercussions.

What does nothing is remaining silent or worse, defending the thinly veiled racism. Both of those actions, like ignoring measles or kudzu, allows it to spread and gain traction elsewhere until it's intractable. Nip it in the bud every single time is the only method that helps.


Btw, imo it's a better plan to find that homeless person and buy them a meal, or socks. Take them in a store (or restaurant if they're presentable enough to not bother other patrons), let them buy what they want or need, and pay for it. Yes, you have to interact with them longer and not just drop a bill to feel good about yourself, but the results are much better, and your gift won't be stolen by others or used for drugs. Those just looking for drug money will usually refuse the offer in my experience.

BSR said:

File that under the "Thoughts and Prayers" column. It does nothing.

....give him or her $20 bucks and drive away.

ant (Member Profile)

When your bear had a hard day and needs some extra love

Mordhaus jokingly says...

Well I'm married, so I don't have to worry about that anymore, but I 'used' to not want anything that nipped my leg near my crotch.

PlayhousePals said:

I don't think pulling him in closer to your crotch after he just nipped your leg is such a great idea. Could be just me though ....

When your bear had a hard day and needs some extra love

Is Your Cat A Catnip Addict?

Cat Vs. Optical Illusions

This cat is no dog!

Kitty says "You Shall Not PASS!"

Krokodil - Inside a cookhouse

Chairman_woo says...

It's insanely cheap and potent.

TBH the only way I think it could be nipped in the bud in the west is by legalising heroin to push the price down.

Junkies will find a way. If the easiest way is a drug that will kill & injure them many many times faster than a more costly and harder to obtain alternative, then that's the drug they will gravitate towards.

Much like with the rise of crystal meth.

Crack and heroin require them to maintain a fairly substantial income to fund the habit. Addictions to Crystal and Krokodil can be sustained on a relative pittance.

artician said:

This is still going on?

one of the many faces of racism in america

newtboy says...

Well, yes, that's possible but not likely, to hold that theory you must assume the people running it are both 1)100% tolerant of antagonistic racist behavior and 2)liars. I'll give them the benefit of a doubt that they didn't bow to perceived possible future pressure and actually found this personally disgusting. That's not a stretch for most. It's also quite possible they saw it as a potential internal lawsuit they were nipping in the bud.

I asked about his rights...I asked..."does he have a right to his job?" The answer is no.

Ahhh, but it's not illegal to ADVOCATE for having sex with children, only to actually HAVE sex with children. What would you arrest him for?

'intent to harm'? Certainly not. For pedophiles, they don't think having sex with children is harmful to them, so there's no intent to harm. On the other hand, the racist DID intend to harm (intentional infliction of emotional distress is a crime in many places) those he ridiculed, he just isn't very good at it.

Advocating for legalization of something is not the same as advocating people doing it illegally....so no.

If the company has a strict 100% no drug policy, yes. I hate those kinds of policies, but I do see that private companies have the right to hire people they trust, and if using drugs makes them lose that trust in a person, they can fire them...for any stupid thing really.

I'm pretty sure we have laws protecting people from being fired based on political affiliation...so no.

Again, I never said it was justice. I said it's reality. I actually mentioned that I think it's overboard that he's essentially unemployable now, but also mentioned that he could get a job with Trump, or any number of other employees that don't have a problem with his racism. Being fired for ridiculing random strangers for being non-white and therefore on welfare...well, that's poetic justice at least, if not pure justice. Poetic justice is a form of justice...so yes.

Companies have every right to not employ grotesque and offensive people. Don't you think?

Again...intentional infliction of emotional distress...that's harm. Not physical harm, but harm none the less. You may disagree, but you're disagreeing with the law and supreme court, not me.

They were no threat to his livelihood, he's not a fracker, he's in construction.


When is it OK to hold them to company policy? When they are making public, recorded, unambiguous, inapropriate statements and actions. The company draws the line, the company decides where, the company enforces it. If this were due to an outside influence, I would think differently, but because the company itself wrote how disgusted they are and that they have a zero tolerance policy for this...it's fine. He's not just a racist bastard off work...if they have a single person of color working for them, they just saved themselves from a HUGE lawsuit for allowing a hostile work environment.

Yes, the courts have said they have that right.

Again...no PC police here, just his company bosses that were outraged and disgusted with him...and they fired him. This is not new, or strange in any way. It happens hundreds of times daily.

Why? Because we have decided that firing/denying service to someone based on their (or your) religion is not acceptable, and codified that in law. Racists have no such protection, either by society or the law.

yes, I can look at the entire situation and see that some justice was served. I can also look to the future and see that it likely will be over served....but not necessarily. He just needs to apply to the Trump campaign, they love this kind of person, then it will be pure justice.

Look to the past. This 'moral calculus' has been in effect and in use for decades. I find it disturbing that you only get upset about it when it's applied to racist douchebags...he's insanely far from the first one.

Once again...NO PC POLICE HERE. Why don't you get it? Come on man...please...just GET IT. This is a private companies sole action...not bowing to PC police...the PC police didn't have time to find out where he worked and complain, the company saw it and said 'Aww HELL no!".

I would also rather keep my liberty and freedoms...like the liberty and freedom to hire people that share my level of civility, and display that at all times, not only while being paid. Fortunately for me, that's what the law says today...but if people thinking like you have your way, that liberty and freedom will be lost and companies will be forced to hire and not fire disgusting pieces of racist shit like this...because people that think like you are can't fathom that his job found this disgusting, you've decided it MUST have been the PC thugs (or fear of them) that forced his job to fire him, PC thugs that must be fought, so you're fighting. To me, that's just sad, and incredibly poorly thought through or understood...and a bit like seeing racism where it doesn't exist.

You have your liberty and freedom to do as you wish...there was NEVER the freedom to do what you wished AND HAVE NO CONSEQUENSE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. That's what you're advocating. This isn't about a law, it's a private company's private decision...no right has been removed, you have the right to be as disgusting as you wish, you don't have a right to force yourself into a job.

In short, this is his (non existent) right to keep his job VS his bosses right to fire him. The right right won out.

EDIT: It seems you two have not considered the possibility that the company might be owned by a black person.

enoch said:

no mistaken assumption my friend.
just looking at the bigger picture is all.

was the "company" really disgusted by this mans behavior?
or were they performing damage control?
i suspect the latter.

which is why i brought up the PC police and the inherent dangers within.i even referenced a case in canada which had gone too far.(in my opinion).

does the company have a right to fire him? short answer? yes.
but nobody is asking about this mans rights,and if they are honest with themselves it is because he is a grotesque example of a human being.

so you try to further your point by doing a thought experiment,and i hate thought experiments,but ok..lets play:
what if he was advocating the legalization of sex with prepubescent children?

ah my friend.
this is easy.
the answer is arrest and convict.
but why you may ask?

here is where i think you may be misunderstanding my argument and your thought experiment reveals this quite plainly.

to YOU.this example of child sex and our racist turdnugget here are the same.

they are not.

because advocating to legalize child sex is an "intent to harm".the adovcating will result in actual harm of actual children.see:child pornography.

while turdnugget here has actually harmed no one.
nobody was actually harmed.
maybe disgusted.
maybe a feeling or two.

lets try another thought experiment.
what if this man was filmed not being an ugly racist but rather smoking weed with some buddies.

should he be fired?

another one:what if he is filmed at a sanders rally (unlikely) and the president of the company is a die-hard trump supporter?

should he be fired?

look,it is easy to view this man losing his job as some kind of justice,but we need to be honest why we are ok with THIS man getting fired and that reason is simply that he is grotesque and offensive.

but he did not actually HARM anyone.he was just offensive and IS offensive to our sensibilities.

i agree that there is an irony in this situation.the man verbally attacks a perceived threat to his livelihood,and then loses that livelihood.

it may have a certain poetry to it,but is that justice?
no.

the larger argument is this:when is it considered normal or acceptable to hold people to a company standard when they are:
not working.
not in uniform.
not representing the company in ANY way.
are not getting paid for this off time.
are engaging in activities which are harming no one but may be viewed as contrary to company standards?


where is the line drawn?
and who draws that line?
who enforces it?

while the company has a right to fire you for any reason it wishes,does it have a right to impose behavior,activities,personal life choices when you are not on the clock?

with the PC police engaging in ever more draconian and bullying tactics to impose their own sense of morality upon others,based on what THEY feel is righteous and morally correct.i feel this will get out of hand very quickly,and the canadian example i used is only one of many.

here is one thing i do not understand.
how come when the religious right uses tactics very similar to this,we all stand up and shout "fuck you buddy",but when the PC police behave in an almost identical fashion....people applaud.

that is just NOT a morally consistent stance.
it is hypocritical.

so maybe in the short run we can view this ugly example of a human being and think to ourselves that some form of justice was served,but that is a lie.it may make us feel good and tickle our moral compass as somehow being a righteous outcome to a reprehensible piece of shit,but it is no way justice.

in the larger context and taken to its logical conclusion:this moral calculus could be a future metric to impose obedience and compliance from,not just turdnugget,but EVERYBODY...and that includes you.

and THAT is something that i find extremely disturbing.

the PC police are having a real impact,with real consequences and even though they may have the best of intentions,the real result is social control,obedience and compliance.

i would rather i keep my liberty and freedoms to do as i wish.the PC police can suck a bag of dicks.

Vicious, Terrifying Guard Dog Protects Owner From Attack

Retroboy says...

Runner here (at least before my knees decided enough's enough).

My road route took me past a house where a toy some-such-or-other breed routinely chased me and came close to nipping at my heels. One day my knees weren't the only thing that decided enough was enough. Stopped, turned around, looked at the pesky atom, and ROARED. I'd like to think I'm a kind guy, but in all honesty, the other option of trying to score a field goal on imaginary 40-yard uprights was a very very close second. Runners will understand.

Anyways, I didn't, but it was very satisfying to see that little pest leave a vapour trail on its way back to its old-lady owner, who tried to comfort it against the big bad normally harmless passerby.

Do NOT train your dog to do what these people did. Might look cute, but is not.

Xaielao said:

Funny but teaching him dangerous habits. He'll grow up to be one of those dogs who bites the moment anyone approaches her, who chases people around nipping at their heals. I freaking little dogs like that.

Vicious, Terrifying Guard Dog Protects Owner From Attack

Xaielao says...

Funny but teaching him dangerous habits. He'll grow up to be one of those dogs who bites the moment anyone approaches her, who chases people around nipping at their heals. I freaking little dogs like that.



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