Drunkard
-
Posts
48 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Drunkard
-
-
When Belichick got hired by NE his track record was losing as a HC
He also didn't get to choose his GM either when he got hired. He had to earn that right over time, they didn't just give him the keys to the kingdom (or however you want to word it) until he had a track record of success. I imagine a big part of it had to do with the teams kept hiring away all their assistants, coordinators, and front office people as well.
This guy has never been a head coach in the NFL for so much power and authority to be handed to him.
-
Nothing like letting a first time NFL head coach pick his own boss. They really rolled out the red carpet for him. He's like Belichick (without the track record of winning).
-
The whole concept of a federal minimum wage is retarded because of the gross disparity in the value of a dollar across various locations. It's self-evident that an area with a median income of $40 would not support the same minimum wage as an area with a median income in excess of $100k. All the sanctimonious bull **** in the world can't change that simple reality that !@#$s the entire argument. But logic and reason are no match for wet kitty politics.
Yeah, let's just scrap the whole concept because there are some areas of the country where it's not relevant. We shouldn't worry about border security either because it doesn't apply to Hawaii or many of the non border states.
If all legislation had to apply to all states we wouldn't have most legislation and Congress would get even less done than they do now.
-
So you're basing your argument on my dollar for dollar metaphor?
You do realize that it was an anecdote, and not a mathematical equation, right?...like explaining simple math to kids. I have one apple and give two apples to johnny...
************ * * * * *
However, surprisingly, economics over the long term does generally stay close to a linear dollar for dollar inflation rate simply because the market finds the same equilibrium point. The theory is that a product will always sell for what it's worth under pure capitalist competition; so if consumers suddenly have twice as much money, the product will suddenly cost twice as much.
Disagree? Then write a paper; your beautiful mind could win a Nobel Prize.
I know your example was a rectal extraction. You just happened to skew your numbers in a way to make it look like raises wages doesn't help people at the bottom of the economic ladder so I clarified it.
If I have said raising the minimum wage $10 would only cause prices to go up $1 you would tell me that wasn't realistic.
-
You know, it would be nice to just let these dickheads have their way - give all kinds of unskilled schlubs fifteen dollars an hour for completely unskilled labor based on the belief that "people who work forty hours deserve a livable wage" and see what happens.
i swear, It's almost depressing how few people are able to separate ideals from reality.
Right. It's better to let the biggest company in the world (Walmart) pay many of its workers so little that the government has to subsidize them with welfare, food stamps, and heating oil subsidies right?
$15 an hour may be too high for a minimum wage but it should be set at a high enough level where anyone working 40 hours a week earns enough to not qualify for government assistance. That should make conservatives happy because it means more people pulling the wagon and fewer people getting free rides. Wouldn't you rather have all these fast food workers, janitors, cashiers, and grocery shelf stockers paying into the system instead of taking way more out of it then they pay in?
I know the next argument/excuse is that the welfare threshold just ends up getting raised whenever the minimum wage is raised by that's why coming up with a new living wage or whatever you want to call it should be done in conjunction with welfare reform.
-
You do realize that the cost of the equipment, materials, etc would also go up because those industries would have increased labor costs too.
The inflation records are misleading because industries adjust to the market before and after the legislation takes effect; so there isn't a sudden uptick, just an increased percentage rate over a long period of time.
The easiest way to see this difference is to compare the costs of living between cities/states. Blue vs Red states. Santa Fe vs surrounding cities. -I always like to use Santa Fe as an example (as opposed to Seattle) because it's like sticking San Francisco in the middle of Cuba; the income disparity is so high compared to the surrounding towns.
Yes, it goes up somewhat, but not anywhere near the dollar for dollar basis you stipulated. Inflation does manage to take the before and after into account though. They track the CPI on a monthly basis. The data is all there. Raising the minimum wages does not lead to inflation on a dollar for dollar basis. Not even close.
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/
-
If I had been talking about intelligent design, then you might have a point. I wasn't, so you don't.
It was in my post that you replied to though.
I'd be more than happy to support every Christian bakery in the country and allow them to refuse service to those homosexual sinners in exchange for states like Kansas not being able to try to pass off intelligent design as science.
Right there.
-
This is a bull$%#@ argument right from the start.
Go ahead and google "Christian Bakery" and tell me how many pages you have to sort through before you find a website for a Christian Bakery.
Go ahead and look through the yellow pages - I don't care what city you search - and provide me a listing for a "Christian Bakery".
I'll wait.
This entire issue is ginned up by people who are searching for family owned, mom & pop bakeries who are unused to and uncomfortable with the idea of involving themselves in gay weddings and the lifestyle in general, and once they find one they run to the press, screaming "bigotry and oppression" all the way. Everybody knows this, but people who argue your point of view pretend not to. You may not have a problem with gay weddings, I don't have a problem with them, but some people DO NOT WISH TO BE INVOLVED, and should not be coerced into it. Period.
People who take your position are either being duped or are willing participants in deception.
Or I just really hate the idea of people teaching intelligent design in schools and trying to pass off their religious dogma as science.
No there are not . There are all of those things that just happen to be christian. But they are still just a baker, plumber etc at the end of the day. Using religion as an excuse to discriminate is not something that is a good thing in society. I just don't agree with you. No one is legislating morality on anyone else by saying that you must serve the public that wishes to patronize your services. You shouldn't have a take on it is what I'm saying. If a person who happens to be gay buys a cake, must the baker enjoy sex with men? That is an idiotic way of thinking. It's a business transaction and trying to make it into anything else is folly. If I'm a mechanic and I overhear a customer talking about their being a born again christian, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with everything about them and that they offend every part of my being. Should I then be able to tell them they need to get another tow because I don't want to fix their brakes? No. Even though I think they are an a$$hat that I wouldn't mind seeing get obliterated by a semi, their money will spend as well as anyone else's. And don't give me some line about that person being above hiring an attorney to sue me. They absolutely would be just as likely to do so. If they would not bake a cake for someone who they disagreed with on the basis of something like sexual orientation, I'm damn sure they would. Their " belief system" is simply a defense mechanism allowing them to feel okabout themselves every day even though they realize they are an ignorant a$$ -hat that thinks they have some kind of say over others. Their refusal to do business is their version of a Muslim stoning a gay person or pushing them off a building. They must punish others that don't agree with their antiquated thinking. And no, don't try to tell me that baking a cake for money or fixing a car is punishment depending who is paying you the money. Sheer lunacy. Being " forced" to serve the public that their business is licensed to serve is neither immoral nor actually " forcing" their business to do anything other than what they do for a living. You know, what they applied for a license to do. If someone applies for a license to run a coffee shop, are they being forced to serve their customers or being allowed to serve them? If you want to select customers that you agree with on the basis of " religion" then call it a hobby and knock yourself out. Or make everyone fill out a form when they come in asking them , about their personal lives. See how many customers you get.
I like the cut of your jib, sir. I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
-
So you stand with the Christian baker who files for bankruptcy after being dragged through the court system to be be forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding?
Interesting.
I'd be more than happy to support every Christian bakery in the country and allow them to refuse service to those homosexual sinners in exchange for states like Kansas not being able to try to pass off intelligent design as science.
-
Wow, I came here to post whether my political views have changed over time and read through this thread -- which lurched sideways into the religion-hater's ditch a few pages back.
People of any faith don't deserve to be mocked, and they shouldn't need to be defended. To think otherwise is thoroughly lame.
That's fine until one faith tries to legislate its morality onto others. When that happens I have an issue with it, regardless of whether that faith is Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon, or whatever other faith is doing it.
-
I bet you get your news from the Daily Show.
I watch a little bit of everything, even Fox News, but haven't watched the Daily Show nearly as much since Jon Stewart left (Trevor Noah just isn't as funny in my opinion). I even listen to some of the right wing radio guys for a laugh, although it was much funnier while the muslim Kenyan was still in office. Hearing guys like Michael Savage cry wolf about how Obama has effectively turned the United States into the Soviet Union in one breath then berating him for being impotent and incompetent in the next breath. How a leader can be so incompetent, yet effective at turning the Republic into a socialist state is the epitome of talking out of both sides of your mouth.
-
Mohammed was imaginary?
Was George Washington too? Because nobody has ever seen his home movies from his vacations to Cape Cod.
I thought it was drawing Allah that was forbidden? Shows you how little I know about their version of voodoo. That's why I prefer to poke fun at Christianity. I grew up with that nonsense so I'm more familiar with it.
-
Unlike global
warmingcoolingclimate change, which is all nonsense.Think about it. A bunch of people making up fairy tales to make it seem like man literally has the ability to alter world atmosphere just by burning a few things...all to the extent that it can not only trigger earthquakes and snowstorms, but literally be the cause of all terrorism in the world.
Wow.
Real boogy man stuff there. No wonder there's so much money in it.
I can't access youtube at work but type George Carlin religion is bull **** into google and the video should come up.
-
Why are ridiculing stories from the Koran? Do you hate Muslims?
I haven't read the Koran so I'm not familiar with their particular brand of crazy voodoo. If they have the same type of nonsense in their book though I'd be happy to ridicule it as well. The 72 virgins part sounds ridiculous (almost as if the upper crusties who wrote their book negotiated over the number rather than it be divinely inspired) and I don't care for the way some of them make women wear beekeeper suits. They go apeshit when you draw their imaginary friend which is pretty stupid as well but that's about all I know about them. I'm not afraid to ridicule them whatsoever though. The sooner mankind gets over this nonsense the sooner we can move forward as a species.
-
Are you by any chance familiar with the concepts of allegory and metaphor?
Yes. Are you familiar with sarcasm?
I compared the Bible to Aesop's Fables just a few posts back. I actually agree with some of what's in it when you take it as an allegory. Unfortunately lots of people take it literally and hold it up as if it's some sort of Bible that was written by God or some such nonsense.
-
Ok, so only some of it is nonsense. Got it.
-
There's fairly good evidence that many of the things in the Bible did happen.
It's not a fairy tale, you know. The Old Testament is the history and legal code, highly stylized, of the Jewish people. The New Testament is a heavily edited history of the early Christian sect. The Bible has a strong factual basis.
Because...SCIENCE!
Didn't you read the !@#$ing retard's post?
Talking snakes, virgin births, living inside of a whale, and getting at least two of every creature on earth to !@#$ on a boat doesn't sound like a strong factual basis to me. Sounds more like Aesop's Fables.
-
I'll weep for you as you burn forever and ever in hell for not believing in my just and caring God. So glad I'm a chosen one going to heaven
I'm pretty sure your answer was sarcastic, but here is a fun response when it isn't sarcasm.
-
No. Atheism is lack of belief due to lack of evidence.
Same reason Rational people don't believe in the tooth fairy and Thor. (Although if I was going to choose a belief system, I could do worse than Norse.)
There are Atheists who prostelitize. Those people fit your definition but they are minority. An annoying loud minority but minority.
Most atheists sort of just ignore religious debate as waste of air except when forced to engage.
This is it in a nutshell. Theism is believe in a deity. Atheism is a lack of that belief, usually because there's no evidence. Many religious people try to create a false equivalency where there isn't one. My guess is to make them feel better about having imaginary friends as adults but that's just my guess. The big driver usually stems from the fear of death.
-
There's no need to move goal posts because you're essentially making my point for me.
You're finding the things that you believe to be true to your beliefs, and in the process show little to any respect for those who believe differently than you do. It's just that simple.
Example: You understand the need to protect people, like homosexuals, from discrimination, and have no problem making Christians do something they believe is against their faith, which is what?
Discrimination.
Our federal government wants to make sure you can use any bathroom you want to protect .02% of the world from discrimination. But they will literally sue The Little Sisters of the Poor to force them to do something that is against their religion. Gee, that sounds a lot like what?
Discrimination.
You want to ensure safe, legal and rare abortions, but when people do not want to use their own money to pay for someone else's abortion because they believe that life begins at conception and abortion is murder, you think they're wrong. Because of their religion. And what do we call that?
Discrimination.
You save yourself a lot of time if you just said you hate Christians and wish they'd leave you alone. The problem is, with all the laws that have been passed to shut them down and make them do what YOU want them to do, even if it's against their religion, like pay for abortions or provide condoms to employees, you're trying to stop discrimination through discrimination.
P.S. Poor, single women make up the most of welfare recipients NOT because they can't get an abortion, but because the federal government has a "make more babies incentive program." Have more babies you can't care for, get more money from the government.
PSS. Apparently you and Barack Obama are the two people left who think Planned Parenthood does mammograms. They don't. They're an abortion factory and live off the government dole. They can be an abortion factory ALL THEY WANT. Just not with my money.
I see we've reached the portion of the argument where it's really Christians who are the ones being discriminated against, despite all the evidence to the contrary and the actual demographics of the country.
-
What the Papa John's guy didn't factor in, is that those are what his costs will be if the market remained the same and only his company participated. A system wide increase in wages affects the costs of everything, and he would no longer be given that original price. (So how much more would he have to raise his pizza prices if healthcare also doubled in price overnight? It won't be 14 cents.)
If Walmart decides to increase their wages, their employees would benefit in the current marketplace. If every company did the same, then there would be a flood of capital vying for the same finite amount of products prompting a rise in prices. So Walmart gives it's employess 10$ more, but suddenly the cost of a Happy Meal is also 10$ more. What exactly changed?
It's simple economics. Easy math.
The problem is that people will ignore the numbers because they want to feel good about themselves. That's all the minimum wage argument really is. Decades of examples show us that it changes practically NOTHING locally, -until outside communities start preying on the imbalance (like moving manufacturing to satellite cities; or mexico).
For simple economics and easy math your example figures are sure wrong, and they happen to be conveniently wrong in the same direction that supports your argument and makes the problem seem way worse than it would be (funny how that works). It wouldn't be anywhere close to the dollar for dollar price increases that you're stipulating. The only case that would get dollar for dollar increases would be in an industry where 100% percent of costs are accounted for by labor and even that would only be dollar for dollar in a business that is 100% labor and the service takes exactly an hour. Raw materials, equipment, land, buildings, and other capital make up a pretty large portion as well so doubling the cost of labor would only increase prices by a fraction of that amount. The inflation records before and after minimum wage raises bears this out as well. So yes prices would increase but by less than their paychecks would go up by.
-
First of all, you're confusing state laws (dry Sundays, etc.) with federal laws. Stay focused.
What federal agendas are Christians pushing? Can you cite specific federal legislation being pushed against gays, abortion, science and whatever?
Can you let me know what legislation is currently in the house that is designed to set up camps to change homosexuals? Is is the same legislation pushed on the US via executive order to let transgenders use whatever bathroom they like, or is that different? Or to have federal health care cover the use of hormones to change a child's gender? Is that not conversion therapy, or is it just conversion therapy you agree with?
Can you let me know what legislation is currently in the house to overturn Roe v Wade? How does that legislation currently sit? Or are you confusing it with people who elect congressmen and senators to keep their tax dollars from funding abortions based on their Christian beliefs? You don't want to confuse individual rights with "pushing an agenda," right?
Are you equally upset when a Christian is forced to use their bakery to make a cake for homosexuals? Or is that agenda okay with you? If so, why?
Can you let me know what legislation is currently in the house to put an end to whatever science you are talking about? What science in particular are they against? Is is the science of climate or the science that shows a baby feeling pain at eight weeks old?
Lastly, why do you consider Muslims to be no big deal because they're a minority here, but they can still murder 50 American homosexuals in a nightclub at point blank range in the name of Allah. That's not a big effect on the US? Or just workplace violence?
You seem to just want what YOU want based on what you think you know. It would be better for you to be specific about the things that are scaring you about Christians, but not about Muslims.
First off, where did I say I was was only concerned about the national conservative agenda? I never said that or even alluded to it, otherwise I wouldn't have used the examples that I did, so that's not a focus problem on my behalf, it's an interpretation problem on yours.
More likely you're just trying to move the goal posts so you don't have to defend the nonsense that goes on at the state and local levels regarding passing intelligent design off as science, abstinence only education, or the way red states like Texas pass legislation impeding a woman's right to chhose.
My concerns about evangelicals pushing their beliefs on people who don't hold their same beliefs are stated well enough by that handful of examples and that is enough for me to avoid the GOP like a plague.
I don't know enough about the other type of conversion therapy you're speaking of to have an opinion either way but I don't agree with hormone therapy to convert genders for minors on the surface so I'm not going to try to defend an argument that I'm not even in support of.
The conversion therapy I was talking about isn't done by law to my knowledge it's done by religious nuts applying family and religious pressure to people who happen to be gay. Even if it's not madated by law the Evangelical politicians who support crap like that is enough to cost them my vote in perpetuity. Not that it matters at this point though because as you've already pointed out that kind of nonsense only gains traction at the local levels and usually only in areas with high numbers of evangelicals. It doesn't mean I'm going to ignore it or support the dumbing down the overall population on a wide scale.
The gay customer/Christian bakery thing is a sticky wicket for sure. It sucks in theory that they'd have to bake a cake for them but a line has to be drawn somewhere to protect people from discrimination. Otherwise what's to stop them from refusing service to black people, or muslims, or some other group? I'm pretty sure the Equal Protection clause is written in that Constitution that Conservatives hold up as basically an infallible document that was handed down directly from God to Jesus backed when he lived in Branson, Missouri or some such nonsense.
As for tax payer funded abortions I'm pretty sure Planned Parenthood has opened their books and shown that their federal funding gets spent on things like mammograms and other non abortion services.
I don't dispute that fetuses can feel pain and I'm not pro-abortion. Even people who are pro choice like I am want abortions to be safe, legal, and RARE. The conservatives totally lose any moral highground on this issue though with their love the fetus, hate the baby approach though. They'll scream abortion is murder till the cows come home then vote for some !@#$ that promises to cut welfare for all those "takers". Who makes us most welfare recipients? Poor, single, women with kids. Who has most of the abortions in this country? Poor, single, women. So the Republicans want to force poor women who get pregnant to hve these kids they can't afford, then also want to cut assistance they'd be eligible for. If they really want to reduce the number of abortions shouldn't they be in favor of increasing aid to single women with kids?
I've also never said that the religious psychobabble of muslims was no big deal. In fact I think it's a huge deal. The way many/some/most muslims treat gays, women, and non-muslims is despicable and they are way worse than the way Christians have been in centuries (way to go team Jesus, although that's not exactly a high bar to get over). I merely said it wasn't as big of a problem, relatively speaking, to what Evangelicals do in the US because of scale. Muslims have very little political clout in the US where Evangelicals have a ton. It's purely a matter of scale and proximity. I'm way more likely to be hassled by the Jesus nut down the street than the Allah nut threatening infidels for someone drawing his imaginary friend.
-
I don't see how you can say glabal warming in and of itself is a hoax.
http://time.com/4637064/2016-hottest-year-on-record/
2014 was the hottest year on record until it was surpassed by 2015, and then that was surpassed by 2016. One is an incident, two is a coincidence, but three is a pattern. That is global warming.
We can disagree/argue/debate about the amount of contribution humans have had to the rise of temperature but I have zero interest in debating the fact that the earth is getting hotter because it is a fact. Trying to debate when one side just outright ignores basic facts is an exercise in futility.
-
Don't peg me as a Jesus freak im not.
You pegged me as some sort of lord to the noobs or whatever video game/internet geek nonsense so I'd say it's fair game.
Beane hired as GM
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Whatever, man. There's a reason the playoff drought is almost old enough to vote. If whining about others whining makes you feel better about the hire, good for you.