Forced Ranting

i-am-dallas:

My sister is poor. She has never had healthcare insurance. She still doesn’t. So she looked into getting on Obama-care. She pretty much has to. While looking at the rates and the fine print she called me and wanted to read me some of the stuff that the mandatory providers are providing.

Insurance for her, a 40 year-old woman living under the poverty line, is $648 a month and a $5200 ANNUAL deductible.

Think about that. Obama-care was claimed to provide insurance to those who could not afford insurance. But all that has happened is that poor people are forced to buy something they don’t have the money for. Obviously she can’t pay for it, and so the government’s solution is to literally fine her $90 per year, increasing the fine each year thereafter until she can afford it. Think of how counter-intuitive and oxy-moronic that is.

Even IF she could afford the $648 a month premium -which is far more than her rent- she could never afford to actually use the coverage because of the deductibles. So all that’s been accomplished pretty much goes like:

Don’t have insurance? You still won’t have insurance, but only now you’re going to get fined for not having insurance.

It is literally like the banks who charge you money because your account has a zero balance.

If your sister is living at or near the poverty line, under Obamacare she’s supposed to enroll in Medicaid, not the exchanges.

communismkills:

The best part about sarcastically mocking the social justice warriors with their own language and on their own terms, is if they deny what I say is what they’re doing, they’re just proving they don’t actually care about social justice.

So if I call out someone with the URL “spooky” for being racist, or someone using the word “madness” to describe mental illness, or someone saying that I need to fold laundry as a woman and calling that “sexist”, and they laugh it off and say no, that’s not the case and omg ur stupid: they don’t believe in social justice. Those are actual things social justice bloggers have said and advocated, as real positions of social justice. If they deny their wrongdoings due to the messenger alone, they are faking their entire ideological commitment to social justice.

I think you’re engaging in a bit of projection here. You value ideological consistency, not them.

Remember, in SJ-land, who is speaking is at least as important as what they are saying. Since your privilege is so high, anything you say can easily be dismissed without any reference to ideology or consistency.

Expecting them to play by your rules is a mistake.

Dan Rather: The War Drums Are Beating

priceofliberty:

fandomsandfeminism:

lightningthewarrior:

Reject the notion that you have to “contribute” to a capitalist society in order to deserve food, water, and shelter.

persona-nongrata:

blackandgoldkeywork:

fandomsandfeminism:

A human being’s worthiness of basic necessities should not be determined by their capacity to produce profit for corporations.

Ah yes because earning something instead of having it handed to you is so terrible.

valid point. yes those who cant take care of themselves should be taken care of. it would be very nice if able bodied people had things handed to them but it will never be that way.

Why not? We live in a post scarcity world. Why shouldn’t our economic models change to reflect that? Guaranteed basic income/ citizens salaries are completely viable and more efficient than current welfare systems.

The planet has finite, measurable resources—post-scarcity on Earth alone is a myth (talk to me about space resource extraction and we can start painting a different picture of the future) . If we truly lived in such a word, our economic models would have changed to reflect that. Wealth redistribution always leads to the problems you see today: too much money and power in the hands of too few; the class of people who benefit the most is often the very class of people ordained as ‘fit’ to be political leaders. There isn’t a single example in all of human history where a society’s well-meaning intentions to ‘spread prosperity’ weren’t accompanied by thinly-veiled attempts to concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few.

Isn’t it fascinating that the idea that “a person’s worth is determined by the value of their contributions to other people” is derided as selfish, while the idea that “people deserve things even if they contribute nothing” is considered altruistic?

communismkills:

http://www.filmsforaction.org/takeaction/five-leftlibertarian-reforms-millennials-should-be-fighting-for/

Honest question. How does Kevin Carson sleep at night continuing to call himself a libertarian? And why does he say Obama is a “moderate Republican” and heavily imply Democrats are good?

Here is his 5-point agenda:

1. Free banking
2. Open up “unused” land.
3. End IP laws.
4. End the minimum wage
5. Cut welfare from top to bottom.

Of course his arguments supporting these policies are garbage, because his economics are crap. However, if we set aside the arguments, that basic platform seems libertarian to me — or at least isn’t obviously anti-libertarian.

The one exception is point 2, when he uses the LTV to support the expropriation of South African mines….but in the US and Canada, the  governments are the largest absentee landlords. Privatizing public lands is a libertarian policy, right?

postnationalism:

happyhourprofessional:

Boom goes the gay dynamite

i’m picturing pink fireworks

Aren’t most of those states based on court decisions, rather than popular support?

postnationalism:

happyhourprofessional:

Boom goes the gay dynamite

i’m picturing pink fireworks

Aren’t most of those states based on court decisions, rather than popular support?

On the economics of the length of America’s dicks

afloweroutofstone:

I’d like to extend my deepest thanks to deathwombcatechesis for showing me a study by Tatu Westling of the University of Helinski: “Male organ and economic growth: does size matter?”. The study notes a connection between the average penis size of a nation and said nation’s GDP growth rate. 

I’d like to apply the results of the study to the United States of America to estimate what concrete benefits a potential change in average dick length may yield.

According to the study, GDP maximization size is 13.5 centimeters (5.31 inches), with GDP growth shrinking on either side of that. The paper above also states:

…the average growth rates from 1960 to 1985 are found to be negatively correlated with the sizes of male organs: unit centimetre increase in its physical dimension is found to reduce GDP growth by 5 to 7% between 1960 and 1985.

For reference: the average American erect penile length is 14.15 centimeters (5.57 inches). Because correlation equals causation (as has been well established by the economics community), a reduction of approximately 0.65 centimeters (0.26 inches) in the average American’s penis length would yield a GDP growth increase of 3.25 to 4.55% over 25 years (equivalent to the time period of 1960-1985). Trading Economics estimates that U.S. GDP will be $17.602 trillion in Q4 of this year. Therefore, a national average penile length reduction of ~0.65 centimeters would yield an additional $572.07 to $800.89 billion in gross national product over the next quarter-century. 

Assuming the applicability of Okun’s law, this would translate to a 1.63 to 2.28% decrease in unemployment. (100(572.07/17602) = 2*Δu = 3.25; 3.25/2 = 1.63 for the low-end estimate, 100(800.09/17602) = 2*Δu = 4.55; 4.55/2 = 2.28 for the high-end estimate.) Because America’s civilian labor force currently consists of 155,862,000 people, a 1.63-2.28% increase in unemployment would create 2.54 million to 3.55 million jobs over 25 years.

Conclusion: In a ceteris paribus scenario, shrinking America’s average dick by 0.65 centimeters in length would boost our GDP by approximately $572.07-800.89 billion dollars a year and create approximately 2.54-3.55 million jobs over 25 years. 

Policy recommendation: universal mandatory penile reduction through surgery by 2017. A progressive length reduction chart for varying present lengths can be established upon review of the marginal utility of penis size. Surgery costs for dick-owning individuals could either be provided universally, or required of personal individuals, with those under 500% of the poverty line subsidized by Medicaid or an alternative medical subsidy (in accordance with the decision of NFIB v. Sebelius).

Further work could be done on the fiscal multiplier of penis reduction surgeries and the potential social welfare, productivity, and migratory impacts of making such operations mandatory in order to assist in determining the exact impacts that the above policy could have. Additionally, work could be done on whether or not the employment impacts would lower the unemployment rate below the NAIRU and analyze the inflationary impacts if so.

Edit: fixed the math and edited a bit of the content

Suck it, intactivists. Science has clearly proven that circumcision is good for the economy. Peer review!

runningrepublican:

ohheyitsshanaj:

betterdeadthancoward:

messymessymia:

Fact.

presenting without any further comment

Yes food in every European country is the same. There’s no such thing as Italian or French cuisine. There’s no difference in good from England and Russia.

LASAGNA, MY FAVORITE FOOD IS NOT REAL ANYMORE!!!!! SHIIIIID!

"The greatest thing since Arab cuisine”"The greatest thing since Asian cuisine”"The greatest thing since African cuisine”"The greatest thing since Hispanic cuisine”
no.THE GREATEST THING SINCE SLICED BREAD.

runningrepublican:

ohheyitsshanaj:

betterdeadthancoward:

messymessymia:

Fact.

presenting without any further comment

Yes food in every European country is the same. There’s no such thing as Italian or French cuisine. There’s no difference in good from England and Russia.

LASAGNA, MY FAVORITE FOOD IS NOT REAL ANYMORE!!!!! SHIIIIID!

"The greatest thing since Arab cuisine
"The greatest thing since Asian cuisine
"The greatest thing since African cuisine
"The greatest thing since Hispanic cuisine

no.

THE GREATEST THING SINCE SLICED BREAD.

communismkills:

Dumbest name for a town ever and its history is essentially nothing except “yeah we moved people around.”

"Despite segregation Lincolnia had its own schoolhouse"

Despite?

polandballcomics:

We have found a common ground
Source: reddit

polandballcomics:

We have found a common ground

Source: reddit

Do you think all these feminist campaigns springing up are the signs of a dying movement trying to legitimise itself?
Anonymous

i-am-dallas:

mr-cappadocia:

iamsamizdatjones:

mr-cappadocia:

Actually I think the most important thing concerning Feminism right now is Russia.

I wouldn’t mind a few details, if you don’t mind and have the time. (Not the OP but still curious.)

Supremacist movements thrive during times of war. Rape culture is the feminist version of the war on terror and the red scare.

Imagine what they could get away with during an actual capital W War.

I never noticed that before now! In almost every feminist uprising in America’s history, there was a war going on. This can’t be a coincidence.

Given how often the US has been at war since its founding, that relationship probably exists for many phenomena.

freexcitizen:

oparnoshoshoi:

freexcitizen:

oparnoshoshoi:

I mean, it’s nice to see this issue making a few cops actually stop and think about it.
Chelan county is actually a great place, so I’m glad to see them trying to get rid of this stuff.

I mean it’s not really the equipment that’s the issue though, it’s the broader issue of the mindset of some of these police departments disregard for individual liberties that’s really at issue. Anyone can have an MRAP, grenade launcher or machine gun and not act like a dick with it. I hope some of these local departments are taking in these weapons with the intention of turning them over to the locals in times of need.

Probably not, but we can dream. I agree with everything you said, I’m just trying to find a silver lining. Like maybe a few will realize “who the fuck do they think we’re writing tickets to that we need this stuff?? I mean, it’s heh heh, it’s almost like…we are…the bad…guyyysssssss—oooooohhhhhh…. Yeah, okay. I see what
freexcitizen
and
oparnoshoshoi
were talking about now.”

Same same, but I feel like the media turns the attention towards the actual physical objects and not the ethics, morals, or mentality of officers. I just wanna take the time to point that out, that the equipment is a symptom of a much more pandemic and problematic disease. Body armor, machine guns, and MRAPs aren’t that scary compared to not know the mentality of the person or organization using them.

Agreed. The “culture of policing” is the problem, not the equipment.

The Pentagon doesn’t want this stuff back because for them, this has nothing to do with “militarizing the police” or “preparing for civil unrest”, this is purely about money. As long as the equipment is “on-loan”, it’s not on their own balance sheet. They don’t have to pay to maintain or store the gear. If they had to take it back, it would go back into their budgets, and displace other things the Pentagon wants to spend money on.

economicsresearch:

pages 17 to 19 - As we all know butter and guns are the two axes upon which our entire civilization is precariously balanced. Good luck out there.

economicsresearch:

pages 17 to 19 - As we all know butter and guns are the two axes upon which our entire civilization is precariously balanced. Good luck out there.

I think the Nobel Prize really changed Hayek

eltigrechico:

 Before the Prize: Hayek’s descent into despondency

image

He’s fairly new to being a public intellectual and he’s a little disheartened by the state of discourse

image

He’s getting more worried. He can’t believe a lot of what he’s been dealing with for the past couple decades. He’s considering ending it all.

image

Shortly before the Nobel. He’s fucking done. He doesn’t care at all anymore. His face says “Proffer whatever dumbass harebrained theory you want to throw at me, I’ve heard it all.”

Hayek After the Nobel Prize:

image

That’s a shit eating grin if I’ve ever seen one. He’s got his shiny award and his fuck you Prize money and he’s damn proud

image

Where Hayek once met constructivism and scientism with frustration and despair, now near the end of his life he has learned to laugh at the hubris of his intellectual opponents. Besides, serfdom won’t be his problem.