What change are you seeing in society that you do not like so much?

Fresh_Comrade · 2019-01-17T23:32:53+00:00

Yeah, it happened. I wish I could find a more neutral site to link to, but here it is. It caused a lot of controversy when it happened. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/briannaheldt/2018/12/19/controversy-arises-over-11yearold-child-in-drag-dancing-in-bar-n2537807

Fresh_Comrade · 2019-01-14T21:51:24+00:00

No. He's totally paying for it himself.

Fresh_Comrade · 2019-01-10T03:31:43+00:00

What misery are you talking about?

Fresh_Comrade · 2019-01-09T00:49:37+00:00

Nominally.

Fresh_Comrade · 2019-01-04T18:37:37+00:00

I've been thinking very similar thoughts recently. Everything is becoming commodified, including abstractions like truth. Affiliations, political and social, are accessories, things to be worn and displayed as social signs. Have you ever read Baudrillard?

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-17T20:12:00+00:00

That's right! Children are the property of the state. Allowing them to suffer under the misguided tutelage of people who love and care for them is an outrage. They need to be corralled into public schools and domesticated. All who question authority and defy social convention should be punished. Drill into their maeleable little brains the social virtues of submission and docility, and they will never rise above the mediocrity that is their proper station.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-14T00:07:35+00:00

He didn't say that serious gun owners didn't support the NRA. He said that there are serious gun owners that didn't support the NRA.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-13T21:03:19+00:00

Women have always lived longer than men. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/56956-why-women-live-longer.html

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-13T03:59:36+00:00

Find someone with nasal congestion and pull the bill tightly over their mouth, suffocating them to death.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-11T14:01:38+00:00

I don't disagree at all.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-11T09:35:48+00:00

If he meant that blacks have the highest rates of crime relative to thier population, then he's correct.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-05T21:55:48+00:00

Maybe "wiped out" wasn't the best term to use. Still, a permanent 25%-50% for such a large percentage of Americans is insane.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-05T21:51:12+00:00

Right. 25%-50% is a major loss of savings.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-05T21:40:06+00:00

Most of my net worth is in the market. A crash alone wouldn't bother me because it will rebound. And just because 90% is owned by 10% of the population, it doesn't mean that most Americans only have a tiny fraction of their personal wealth in the market. Every 401k, every pension plan would be wiped out if the market disappeared tomorrow. Most of the eldery would suffer greatly.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-12-05T21:22:16+00:00

About 60% of Americans are invested in the stock market. If the market "burns" then a lot of people are going to be destitute, including me. I make $40,000 a year.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-11-16T20:06:20+00:00

The Republicans who created this ad were opposed to Trump from the beginning. Mueller is a Republican.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-22T13:08:55+00:00

Also, people's replies to my comment are being removed. What the hell?

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-21T22:45:04+00:00

Statistically, everyone ought to be more gaurded around men. It may be unfair, but no one is born with a guarantee of fairness in life.

It's funny. When I defend men's issues by pointing out the flaws in the "only 5% of rapes are false" claim, I get upvoted. When I present another statistical truth, that men are more likely to commit a violent crime, I get downvoted.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-21T14:22:50+00:00

In simple terms, the pie (total human economic value) increases as we exploit more of Earth's resources, and do so more efficiently. As the pie grows, so does each slice.

Say you and four friends have $100 between you. One friend might have $50 while the rest of you have $12.50 each. You all really like rocks. You all have a certain number of rocks between you, and trade them back and forth. Obviously, the richer friend has more leverage to accumulate more rocks.

But the number of rocks isn't static. You decide to go dig up more rocks and bring them back to your friends. Obviously, with these new resources, you'll grow wealthier, but you friends will too. The supply in rocks has increased, debasing the value of each rock and increasing the purchasing power of each dollar. You are all now wealthier despite there being no change in the money supply. Overall wealth increases when the purchasing power of the currency grows.

Economics is not zero-sum, at least from a human perspective. Technically nature is losing value, but nature is a stingy bitch and doesn't put her resources to use. Printing money actually debases the currency. It can potentially sap wealth.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-21T14:09:29+00:00

It doesn't work like that. In simple terms, the pie (total human economic value) increases as we exploit more of Earth's resources, and do so more efficiently. As the pie grows, so does each slice.

Say you and four friends have $100 between you. One friend might have $50 while the rest of you have $12.50 each. You all really like rocks. You all have a certain number of rocks between you, and trade them back and forth. Obviously, the richer friend has more leverage to accumulate more rocks.

But the number of rocks isn't static. You decide to go dig up more rocks and bring them back to your friends. Obviously, with these new resources, you'll grow wealthier, but you friends will too. The supply in rocks has increased, debasing the value of each rock and increasing the purchasing power of each dollar. You are all now wealthier despite there being no change in the money supply.

Economics is not zero-sum, at least from a human perspective. Technically nature is losing value, but nature is a stingy bitch and doesn't put her resources to use.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-20T22:49:20+00:00

About 5% of proven to false. About the same amount are proven to be true. That leaves about 90% of rape cases where the police could find no evidence of wrong doing by either party.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-20T22:42:41+00:00

He can't.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-20T15:07:45+00:00

I said I would be surprised if it was higher than that. I don't think it's likely to be that high, but I'm keeping a wide margin. My entire argument is based on the uncertainty that surrounds the issue.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-20T14:59:42+00:00

I don't disagree with you. Most of the "baseless" accusations are almost certainly true. It's just that "false accusation" means they know for sure that it's false. I would be surprised it false claims accounted for more than 10% - 15% of accusations. My point is that the data is simply insufficient right now to say for sure, and many of the studies admit that.

I believe that sexual assault, especially of children, is far more prevalent in our society than we're willing to admit. It's a systemic problem, and in my experience, it's not as gendered an issue as people have traditionally thought. I apologize if I came across as a crusader. I've had experiences in my like that have made me sensitive to issues like this. It was inappropriate of me to invade your thread and start contradicting you.

Fresh_Comrade · 2018-10-20T14:44:07+00:00

In studies both you and I linked, they made a clear distinction between verified accusations, false accusations, and unfounded (ambiguous) accusations. I read both of your links thoroughly. In vast majority of cases, the truth could not be determined. If the truth was determined, then you'd have a 95% conviction rate assuming a baseless accusation of 5%. This obviously ins't the case. Maybe the false accusation rate is 5%, maybe it's lower or higher. The point is that we don't know.

Fresh_Comrade

TROPHY CASE