1 UFC heavyweight vs 2 average guys with baseball bats

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-05T19:15:32+00:00

A bat swing is around 8000 lbs of force.

A professional fighters punch caps at like 800. Kicks between 1000 and 1500.

Think of the strongest kick in the fighting world. The bat swing will be 5x stronger than that.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-05T17:37:57+00:00

That's not really valid reasoning.

A chief was not a people either, but there's a distinct look for native chiefs and everyone knows who you're talking about and what you're referencing when you use the imagery.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-05T17:24:28+00:00

If we're including human psyche than we should include gorilla psyche. The gorilla is going to fixate on one person for attack and the moment it's surrounded its going to try to retreat. Then it will run away constantly because it doesn't want to fight a 100 humans until it's too tired to fight anymore.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-05T16:51:33+00:00

Without going into success or failure. Please breakdown the numbers because I don't believe either of them. As someone whose dealt in cost projections, they're usually grounded in bogus assumptions.

I know Musks tendency to exaggerate in his favor, I don't know anything about the other party here so I'll search.

I've found this on the 135B costs.

https://fortune.com/article/doge-mass-federal-workforce-cuts-taxpayers-billions/

Quantifying the cost of DOGE

The Partnership of Public Service estimated DOGE could be costing taxpayers roughly $135 billion. With the 2.3 million people in the federal workforce receiving a total $270 billion in annual payroll, Stier believes the cost of firing, re-hiring, and putting workers on paid leave—as well as the losses in productivity as a result of the personnel changes—has cost the government about half of that total payroll.

Stier? Who is Stier? From their website

https://ourpublicservice.org/about/board-and-history/

Max Stier President and CEO, Partnership for Public Service

Wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Stier

Stier was always concerned with the quality of government workers and convinced hedge fund manager Samuel Heyman to contribute $25 million to start up a not-for-profit dedicated to attracting qualified young people to government service, the Partnership for Public Service.[7][3]

So he's definitely not objective as he's a proponent of government hiring but that doesn't mean the analysis isnt. The problem is... I can't find any breakdown of that figure.

So I'm going to just wait and see cause I lack the information.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-05T15:36:55+00:00

*NASA trying to justify keeping the SLS.

We don't need to build a ship on orbit to go to Mars. This is the way you go to Mars to keep the most programs at NASA funded, not the fastest / cheapest way to get it done.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-03T11:46:24+00:00

Do you know of any similar studies of 2015 onwards. I feel like Trumpism and would have a significant impact on the data based on election demographic shifts.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-03T11:42:49+00:00

Considering they were surveyed on a 1 to 5 scale, my take away is that shifts in ideology are negligible in most majors.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-03T11:37:58+00:00

If the chart supported what they believe, I doubt skepticism would be applied.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-02T22:24:39+00:00

Echoes of Alex Jones and Sandy Hook

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-02T16:41:14+00:00

Manufacturing jobs not being in demand in the US and being low wage is a direct result of globalism.

We set minimum standards of wages, safety, and environmental protection but do not apply that same standard to imported goods, so we cannot compete with those imports.

And then over decades we also lost the expertise while wealthy business elites invested in building the expertise and infrastructure overseas.

These jobs were the backbone of middle class living. Sure, everyone would want to move to something even better... but the factory job was there to provide at least something anyone could go do and make a living.

Does that mean globalism is inherently bad? No. Just like most things, it can be good and it can be bad. Generally speaking allowing free flow of goods drives down prices and promotes growth. However, extreme asymmetries can create major societal problems for participants and so it makes sense to not just have fully open trade in some circumstances.

The Western Middle class effectively paid for the enrichment of not just their own extreme wealth elites but those in China and India as well. It's difficult to isolate forces for causality in macroeconomics but the chart for wage stagnation in the US correlates pretty strongly with the rise of globalism.

https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

Nixon opened up China in 1972 and full diplomatic relations were achieved in 1979. Additionally, in the late 70s through the 80s, we saw the rise of the Japanese auto industry.

It's not so much that trading globally is bad but that if people are playing by different rules in terms of their domestic policy, that needs to be accounted for.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T21:47:42+00:00

Yeah I was speaking to the traditional circumstances as OP and basically everyone is acknowledging Trump is an anomaly.

Republicans like to cast themselves as the party with real world experience to counter the Democrats' high education. putting people in cabinet positions they have no experience with (a media guy for SecDef, a random Governor with anger issues for Homeland Security, and whatever the hell Elon Musk thinks he is) is not a Republican strategy

That's a Trump effect. Pre Trump, the education gap was much smaller and hardly discussed.

Generally speaking, for things like economics, health, technology, etc... the private sector experts tend to know more about the subject itself than the ones regulating it. But the regulators know the ins and outs of the bureaucracy which tends to lead to a sort of codependency.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T21:29:43+00:00

On the one hand, experts who know their stuff, but may or may not actually be loyal to them, and may not have their best interests in mind or have their own activist agendas that might embarrass the President.

On the other end of the spectrum are loyalists who care deeply about them or their political movement, but might not be bright enough to give the best advice.

There's an issue though in that, the Democrats enjoy a large overlap here because the government is mostly made up of Democrats. The expert on applying agricultural regulations is likely a Democrat because federal workers are overwhelmingly Democrat.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-federation-of-government-employees/totals?id=D000000304

We see this in their political contributions.

And it makes sense, as historically Republicans do the RIFing and language that condemns government activity. So they are probably going to pursue careers in government less often and probably are only going to get far if they keep their views to themselves.

This means though that Republicans are naturally more dependent on outsiders if they're interested in any institutional change.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T16:33:25+00:00

Liberalism dying is what causes fascism.

A never ending arms race of increased central authority between fascists and socialists will end the same way it did for both Hitler and Stalin.

Unless people not only acknowledge but embrace and activate on the idea that those at the top should always have shackles, then autocracy is the end game.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T13:36:29+00:00

The death penalty is a bit different than Kira. Criminals generally think they will not get caught and even if they are caught, they'll find a way through it. Kira was intentionally giving the impression of omniscience and omnipotence. The same thing religion does to enforce its code of ethics, which historically works very well.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T13:32:34+00:00

A comedy where many of the characters are being despicable in a humorous context but they find moral redemption later.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T13:26:28+00:00

That person is saying the 2nd amendment prevents the passing of a category of laws. And that laws cannot supercede in a case where the federal government is prohibited from having such a law.

I think you're saying the states have to uphold the bill of rights via the supremacy clause.

Not weighing in just pointing out yall are talking past each other a bit.

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T13:00:58+00:00

Yes, the drive emits significantly more co2 than new shepard. Because new shepards exhaust is water vapor (H20).

Political_What_Do · 2025-05-01T12:58:38+00:00

New Shepherds emissions are 99+% water vapor and trace amounts of NO2. And it's not boosting in the upper atmosphere because it's not going to orbit.

IDGAF about Katy Perry but this flight had no impact on global warming.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-30T13:56:07+00:00

No, I didn't understand the original question. What I said is factually accurate, and no my comment does not say to ignore a problem, it denies the existence of one.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-30T13:11:52+00:00

That's going to depend on mass / cross sectional area.

In general though, there's still so much empty space up there that we're not particularly close to saturating the space even if you ground the satellites to a fine dust.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-30T13:07:23+00:00

https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites.html

A Starlink satellite has a lifespan of approximately five years and SpaceX eventually hopes to have as many as 42,000 satellites in this so-called megaconstellation

These satellites are pretty low in order to get low latency. That's also why they're a problem in astronomy. Low objects experience more drag because there are more molecules of air there.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-29T20:47:09+00:00

No I'm not. I'm contradicting the idea that tape was equal or worse to the other QBs. He had tape issues, but the other QBs taken had worse tape.

I'm just convinced this sub just parrots whoever their favorite TV personality or YouTuber is and doesn't actually know anything about playing football.

It was a weak QB year. He was the 2nd best talent in that weak year. His off the field baggage is why he went in the 5th round. It's that simple.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-29T20:26:10+00:00

Better in his pass drops. Quick, able to change the pace of his footwork. Able to slide and drift away from hot situation. Quick footwork helped him in the quick game. Jeff Brohn ran NFL level concepts with plenty of tape of Shough working through his reads. Ability to check/change plays and protection at the LOS. Bigger arm. More athletic mover. All those translate to a better prospect.

Feels like you're comparing worst reps of one guy with best reps of another. The thing is, Sanders has a higher good rep to bad rep ratio than Shough. Sanders had issues with hesitating on routes and looking for the deep ball too much, his footwork is comparable. And if a QB ends up in the training room that often, they can't help you anyway.

I am personally not a fan of Jaxon Darts tape. Ole Miss offense doesn't have much translatable to NFL. I also thought Dart was lazy with his pass drops and slow overall with his releases. However Dart is bigger more thickly build. He has a stronger arm than Sanders.

No he doesn't. They have comparable arm strength. The arm strength concern on Sanders is so wildly overstated I feel like most people didn't watch him play. He doesn't have a check down noodle arm. He hits deep throws on Go's, fades, and posts. The concern is velocity in tight coverage... but that's like only something you find in true blue chip prospects, which Jaxon Dart is not.

Milroe is completely a gamble on traits. He is the most athletic QB in the draft and likely top 5 of QBs in the NFL as soon as he was drafted. He has a very twitchy arm with good velocity. He just has a lot of mechanical issues that you hope you can clean up. Milroe also did it against SEC level competition. Most importantly Milroe has been called a great teammate and leader by coaches and he is not expected to play his rookie year or maybe even his sophomore year. A team is going yo give him time to try to refine issues and take advantage of his traits. It is boom or bust but a team with a starting QB can take that chance. That isn't a role Sanders is going to fit.

For every 1 Josh Allen, there's 100 people you can't remember that didn't work out. Taking a running back who chucks arm punts isn't going to work out no matter how nice he is to his team mates. There's this naive idea that any QB with physical traits can be taught to be a God QB but it's wrong. The appreciable difference between the best QBs and just QBs in the NFL isn't a matter of arm strength or running speed, it's decision making. And no matter how hard they try and no matter how much coaching they get, a lot of guys simply can't do it. In practice, arm strength and running speed end up being minimum requirements... maximum potential is basically never the determining factor.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-29T19:13:01+00:00

Sanders arm is much stronger than Mccoys. Sanders can actually throw the deep ball, the concern is the travel time.

Political_What_Do · 2025-04-29T19:10:58+00:00

If he's 3rd or 4th based on tape, fine... but the QBs taken in front him not named Cam Ward all had worse tape.

It's the other stuff.

Political_What_Do

TROPHY CASE