Various interesting stuff

Dragatus wrote:

I agree with Kara in general, but I'm pretty sure Feral was joking and Jad was trolling.

Did you leave Auspex on!?

I think Israel should be given more land and power in the name of diversity. Everyone (well, China, Venezuela, Russia, Myanmar etc maybe not) goes for democracy. Syria is falling so soon Israel will be the only National Socialistic country in the world. They should have special rights.

Yeah, my sense of humour is not popular at the Synagogue. Even if everything I just wrote is technically true.

@Kara: You formulated a long and convincing argument. I am actually impressed. Maybe try and sway some minds locally? Start a movement? Waiting for others could mean waking in Sharia Law area one day, even if it is not that bad as in UK yet. Muslims have demography going for them. It is ironic that they are doing to Europe now what Jews did to Palestine then. I sometimes wonder whether the results would be similar. I doubt it, white Europeans rarely have it in them to fight for their causes anymore.

@Jad: Even if you are from a shithole, you could have valid observations on how things should not be done... But I agree they coming from a working country makes it you more credible. Street cred and all that.

I believe in the right of conquest too. It is how all existing states acquired their territories. To deny new actors entry to the stage could only lead to stagnation. I would not welcome more DAESH like creations, but I fully expect them. Abkhasia and Osetia were better ideas...

Auspex is free to use, so you can leave it on as long as you want.

I don't believe in right of conquest, but I do believe in right of time. By now you have Jews born in Izrael that have grandchildren, so you can't really say it's not their land anymore. And from things Feral linked/posted in the past it does look like they're taking better care of the land itself than their Arab neighbors too, so that's a thing in Izrael's favor.

But it'd be real nice if they could not shoot unarmed protesters.

And this old gem seems somewhat relevant to the discussion:

If y'all could stop changing a single letter in random fucking words, that'd be great.
G*d, Izrael, what's next? Palestyne, Medit*rranean, Agypt, Docksucker... just fuck *ff m4

Wait, what letter did I change in Izrael?

Never mind, the spell checker let me know that apparently it's spelled Israel in English.

That's so that the believer doesn't take his name in vain.

The video is sadly accurate...

Yeah, not shooting unarmed protesters could get a higher priority, that one is for sure.

I am quite in agreement to the idea of the right of time... How would you treat a cases of population shift/exchange according to it?

@Philo: Because I like to be a little Kosher sometimes. You know, the blood makes me. Draggy did a mistake, no reason to make a fuss out of it. It is Izrael in Polish too...

WTF is a docksucker?

To think of it, how would a Jewish Canite feed?

A docksucker is what you get when you cross a cocksucker with a dicksucker.

I don't have the whole right of time concept fleshed out in detail or anything, but the basic principles is that the longer an individual or a group of people stay in a certain place the more right they have to the place. A new arrival has no rights, then it gets fuzzy, then after several generations there is a clear right to be there, though you might have to contend with laws and other rights. If you have two groups laying claim to a place the one that's been there longer has more right, but that by itself doesn't invalidate the claim of the other side.

Like if one group has lived somewhere for 1000 years and a second group lived there for 200 years, the first group's claim to it is stronger, but the second group still has a strong claim too.

Conversely if a group has lived somewhere for a long time but was later removed they would start losing their claim to the place.

Cretino wrote:

I like Kara even more now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo_SivTSUrE

Dragatus wrote:

A docksucker is what you get when you cross a cocksucker with a dicksucker.

I don't have the whole right of time concept fleshed out in detail or anything, but the basic principles is that the longer an individual or a group of people stay in a certain place the more right they have to the place. A new arrival has no rights, then it gets fuzzy, then after several generations there is a clear right to be there, though you might have to contend with laws and other rights. If you have two groups laying claim to a place the one that's been there longer has more right, but that by itself doesn't invalidate the claim of the other side.

Like if one group has lived somewhere for 1000 years and a second group lived there for 200 years, the first group's claim to it is stronger, but the second group still has a strong claim too.

Conversely if a group has lived somewhere for a long time but was later removed they would start losing their claim to the place.

I think this could be the basis of international law... Sans the dick sucking part, of course.

@Sally: Well, according to the above quoted theory you lose the rights the rights to Kara the more absent you are...
Welcome back and add a 5 cents sometimes!

https://9gag.com/gag/awXzxeD?ref=fsidebar

Dr Mubarak from Bangladesh, invents bio degradable plastic from jute after 20 years of research. Stronger than plastic, lower cost and same as plastic. Degrades naturally after 6 months. No more oil based plastic.

Feral wrote:

Dr Mubarak from Bangladesh, invents bio degradable plastic from jute after 20 years of research. Stronger than plastic, lower cost and same as plastic. Degrades naturally after 6 months. No more oil based plastic.

Let's hope this catches up. I doubt it.

Because, regular plastics are made from the oil, and, like, no one wants to deal with oil anymore.

@Feral: Do the positions matter when it's all about anal?

Jad.3 wrote:

Because, regular plastics are made from the oil, and, like, no one wants to deal with oil anymore.

@Feral: Do the positions matter when it's all about anal?

Of course, you may get rather different stimulation frome different positions, on the prostate, off prostate...
Do you want me to go into details?

Yes.

No.

Vote 50:50 so far. Let's wait for others...


This gave me hope for humanity:

https://9gag.com/gag/aXxozBd?ref=fsidebar

Maybe something on topic for a change:

Trickle down economics do not work, that's why as the rich get richer, the poor gets poorer. You know, what we're seeing right now in the US.

Karavolos wrote:

Trickle down economics do not work, that's why as the rich get richer, the poor gets poorer. You know, what we're seeing right now in the US.

Well, in China and India it works. They are more capitalist countries too... Oh, the irony...

For China I could tell, as we have joint venture with one institute there. It is anecdotal evidence of course, but despite many problems it does get better.

Feral wrote:

Karavolos wrote:

Trickle down economics do not work, that's why as the rich get richer, the poor gets poorer. You know, what we're seeing right now in the US.

Well, in China and India it works. They are more capitalist countries too... Oh, the irony...

For China I could tell, as we have joint venture with one institute there. It is anecdotal evidence of course, but despite many problems it does get better.

These are three different things

-Less obstacles for trade
-Free Market ideology
-Trickle Down Economics

What this video is trying to do is pick number 1, say it's the same as number 2 and 3 and then call Trickle Down Economics good.

The less obstacles a country has for trade and business, the better it will do in general. However, there are many obstacles for trade that a country might be better off using than adopting the laissez-faire approach.

Free Market ideology is basically an exportation product developed by the British only after they have attained industrial supremacy in the world through non-free market policy. Think about it. Once your industry can outdo anyother in the world by a great margin, going around saying that everyone should remove it's trade restrictions (and letting your better quality / lower price destroy the competition) is the best possible strategy you could do. When the US obtained the industrial supremacy in the world through non-free market policy, it too started saying the same things, even though they were never too keen to apply it themselves. Now that China is surpassing the US in all levels, we now see Trump and the americans' tone change about how they need to protect their industry.

Do not call what happens in India and China "Free market" or either "trickle down at work". Both India and China have opened themselves more to trade with the rest of the world, yes, but doing so in only specific manners and with great restrictions on who or what could buy or invest there.

Again, I'm not saying a freer trade is bad, because it isn't. But to call it the holy grail, the only thing you need to do to make a country rich is a bold face lie that has trapped many countries in poverty.

ThePhilosopher wrote:

Now that China is surpassing the US in all levels, we now see Trump and the americans' tone change about how they need to protect their industry.

That and because the rampant outsourcing of jobs have fucked over so many people and spiked both unemployment and poverty which fucks the middle class right up the ass so the company which did the outsourcing can pay in cents rather than dollars to people in poorer countries who may or may not have a choice in the matter and there's an ongoing backlash against that, with many advocating protectionism so the companies can't outsource their jobs anymore.

It's one of the reasons Trump won, his rhetoric was that he'd protect the jobs and people rolled the dice on it. And lost; my example being the Carrier deal where he made gigantic concessions to the company to reduce the amount of outsourcing they did, which lasted those jobs he "saved" for another couple of months before they outsourced them anyway when nobody was looking.

My stance on free market is that you need to have some regulations lest it devolves into reckless venture captialism where corporations will do anything to milk more money out of people, usually to the people's detriment like what we're seeing in America. But at the same time regulations are not inheriently good; if you're going to implement regulations you need to make sure they're sensical and don't wreck too much havoc upon the producers either, otherwise nobody will be incentivized to produce things anymore, let alone open businesses in your country and that will make people lose out on the products in kind. It's all a balancing act, and not an easy one either.

Well said indeed, Kara. I see a lot of over eagerness and legislative diarrhea here in Poland, I fear it is no different elsewhere.

In the essence it means the market is cornered: you must have a business and be able to afford lawyers to afford a business. It is no coincidence social status and income stratum one belongs to became largely hereditary.

Karavolos wrote:

ThePhilosopher wrote:

Now that China is surpassing the US in all levels, we now see Trump and the americans' tone change about how they need to protect their industry.

That and because the rampant outsourcing of jobs have fucked over so many people and spiked both unemployment and poverty which fucks the middle class right up the ass so the company which did the outsourcing can pay in cents rather than dollars to people in poorer countries who may or may not have a choice in the matter and there's an ongoing backlash against that, with many advocating protectionism so the companies can't outsource their jobs anymore.

It's one of the reasons Trump won, his rhetoric was that he'd protect the jobs and people rolled the dice on it. And lost; my example being the Carrier deal where he made gigantic concessions to the company to reduce the amount of outsourcing they did, which lasted those jobs he "saved" for another couple of months before they outsourced them anyway when nobody was looking.

True that.

Karavolos wrote:

My stance on free market is that you need to have some regulations lest it devolves into reckless venture captialism where corporations will do anything to milk more money out of people, usually to the people's detriment like what we're seeing in America. But at the same time regulations are not inheriently good; if you're going to implement regulations you need to make sure they're sensical and don't wreck too much havoc upon the producers either, otherwise nobody will be incentivized to produce things anymore, let alone open businesses in your country and that will make people lose out on the products in kind. It's all a balancing act, and not an easy one either.

Indeed. That's the entire reason economists exists. There are market flaws and there are government flaws. Capitalism is like a force of nature: saying it's evil means nothing, and trying to get away from it is impossible. So you should learn how you can properly focus it to make everyone's lives better, which, to be honest, so far it overwhelmingly has.

@Feral: Every legislative body thinks that not only it's laws will be followed to the word, but also that the intent of the law will be achieved perfectly. I don't agree with your bullshit defeatism though.