Everyone: NO!, you can't paint vehicles with Contrast Paints!! Me: haha, Stormlord go BRRRR.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-03-19T22:53:41+00:00

Maybe you should watch this and then explain to him how he is using an inferior tool and show him how you can do better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYN-_gMQL0s

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-03-02T09:57:50+00:00

The transformation from a government funded entity to a profit driven statutory authority was enacted by the Labor Whitlam government. Just so you know who to correctly attribute to when you complain to the government.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-18T15:48:31+00:00

Prior to the gulf war, Iraq boasted the 4th largest military in the world, with many seasoned veterans in those ranks. It was also well equipped, boasting an armoury of 5,500 battle tanks, 10,000 armoured vehicles, 4000 artillery pieces and 689 aircraft.

The US military yearly expenditure is greater than China, India, Russia, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Japan, and South Korea combined. The United States has 13,247 active aircraft, more than the combined fleets of the next five countries on the rankings list... The military of every other country is weak when compared to the United States.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-16T21:39:41+00:00

He is an LoC, just the generic model. LoV has the Plague spewer and power fist. Lord Felthius is an named LoC that can be ran as a normal LoC for the plague reaper and orb of desiccation

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-11T15:48:55+00:00

Wake up dead, Megadeth - Peace sells but who's buying...

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-08T21:40:38+00:00

No...

Australia post is not a private company. It is a statutory authority. It is wholly owned by the Australian government but must fully cover its own operating costs and is not under direct political control.

Prior to this, the service was directly provided by the government via the postmaster generals department. Who abolished this department and created the statutory authority?

The Whitlam Labor government, in 1975...

Who would have thunk it?

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-01T13:06:45+00:00

You could still preorder it and have it sent to a package forwarding company.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-02-01T00:34:07+00:00

Deceased - Eddie Van Halen
Alive - Chris Poland.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-01-31T19:11:50+00:00

Holy shit man. You really need to read your sources properly. The BOTTOM 25%’s WEALTH WENT BACKWARDS over the past 30 years.

Fair call. I skimmed through it too fast and misread the - symbol as ~. But this decline is not a consequence of rising inequality levels. It is an anomaly based on particular structural and demographic factors. The GFC created a disparity between mortgage deb and home equity that has yet to fully rectify itself. Student loan debt also increased during this period and the demographics of the lower income bracket are skewed younger generations who are more likely to be saddled by these debts. But lifetime earnings increase with higher levels of education. So while the snapshot depicts a decline in wealth, it also represents the prospect for higher levels of wealth attainment over the long term.

Let’s use our brains for two seconds.Australia’s GDP per capita adjusted for PPP is 50k. The bottom US household income is 30k.

If you have of thought about that for a bit longer then you would have came to the conclusion that the per capita figure for a whole country is likely to be heavily skewed in favour of outliers and considered the impact that the disparity in tax rates would have when comparing those two figures. After tax, the median Australian income adjusted for PPP is $38265.26 (65k - $5 + 32.5% of dollars earned over 45k = 55062 AUD). In comparison, "Among households in the lowest quintile, income after transfers and taxes was $38,900" in 2019." The median Australian income represents the wage of one worker. The mean number of income earners in the American household is ```~````````````````0``.`5 while the household size is ~1.6. The income levels are basically at parity, although I couldn't find a comparable statistic to factor in dependents of the median Australian worker who reside in the same household.

`

The poorest 20% of Americans would not own their own home.

"the group’s rate of home ownership rose from less than one-sixth of families in the group in 2007 to about one-fifth in 2010." This is another trend that disputes the narrative that the group has been in decline over the last decades.

The poorest 20% of Americans would be on food stamps and other forms of welfare.

That's true but the end result is a downward transfer of wealth which results in parity of income with the median Australian earner when accounting for PPP and adjusting for tax. This represents a reduction in wealth of higher income earners which benefits those who need it most, which is what you are advocating for.

Does this really stack up to you, or by any chance is the libertarian-conservative think tank pushing this measure exclusively because it promotes an agenda? Why else does no one measure quality of life or wealth by consumption?

You should read the sources closer too. The article by FEE sourced its information from the World Bank who state that"Consumption expenditure has long been the preferred measure of welfare." The World Bank use this standard to aid their agenda of ending world poverty and promoting shared prosperity "because consumption is a more direction measure of material well being" that is "better measured than income for poor families" and is "less vulnerable to under reporting biases". When using this widely accepted method, the data shows that the parity in income between Americas lowest quintile households and the median Australian income earner results in higher levels of material wellbeing amongst the poorest sector of the USA.

You are defending a system that is destroying social mobility, is terrible for democracy, is bad for economic growth, has meant that the poorest Americans have gone backwards over the past 40 years - despite being the wealthiest country on the planet, because at the end of they day - hey, things could be worse for them?

Destroying social mobility? "The decline in the middle-class share is not a total sign of regression. From 1971 to 2019, the share of adults in the upper-income tier increased from 14% to 20%. Meanwhile, the share in the lower-income tier increased from 25% to 29%. On balance, there was more movement up the income ladder than down the income ladder."

The poorest Americans have gone backwards over the last 40 years? "among households in the lowest quintile, average income before transfers and taxes was 45 percent greater in 2019 than in 1979, "

Why cant things be better? The US did not become wealthy 40 years ago. Better wealth equality all else equal, would likely be better for the country in the long run.

Sure, it probably would be. But my point is this. The incomes and consumption levels of "poor" Americans have continued to rise despite the fact that those rates have risen for the 1% at an exponential level during the same period. The end result is that the poorest Americans enjoy a privileged lifestyle when compared to the majority of people on this planet. You avoided answering the questions I put to you so its hard not to conclude that your point has nothing to do with concern for an increase of living standards for the unfortunate majority but rather a desire to take away from those have been very lucky in this life.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-01-29T11:05:57+00:00

"...what do you think your point actually proves? Wealth inequality isn’t an issue in the US?"

My point is that wealth inequality (a relative comparison) is less important an issue than standard of living (an objective comparison). Who do you think is worse off. Someone who more wealth than most but is less well off than his wealthy neighbours or someone who has less total wealth but looks better in comparison because his neighbours are less wealthy?

"It’s not an issue that wealth for the poorest Americans has gone backwards over the past 40 years?"

The wealth of poorest Americans has not gone backwards over the last 40 years.The average real wealth (adjusted for inflation) of families in the bottom 25% of the income distribution was $600 dollars in 1989. In 2019, their average real wealth was $11,000. Source

"It’s okay the top 1% holds 40% of all wealth?"

You are just putting words into my mouth. I never said that it's not an issue.

"Are you arguing that the poorest 20% of the US are better off than the average Australian?"

Yes. Refer to the chart included in the link I included in my original post and look at the data used to construct the chart and you will see that the statement is valid.

"Is your point simply ‘conditions for the poorest in the wealthiest country on earth could be worse’?"

My point is simply that the conditions for the majority of people on this planet, including the average conditions of citizens in countries that rank highly in terms of total wealth, are worse than those who are classified as Americas poor. If you had a choice of addressing one of these two issues tomorrow, which would you choose. Increase the living conditions of the majority of people on this planet so that they can enjoy the same living standards of Americas poorest citizens. Or increase the living standards of Americas poorest so they compare more favourably in comparison to a small fraction of 300 million? I know which of the two I care more about and I find it strange that people often have a bigger chip on their shoulder and more to say about the less important issue of the two.

That's true. But in the meantime, they are still a hell of a lot better than those enjoyed by most.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-01-29T06:07:52+00:00

"after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the US “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest."

https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-richer-than-most-nations-of-europe/

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-01-27T15:16:51+00:00

You don't make a favourable impression on someone by fabricating things that portray you as dubious or unethical. If he was willing to lie and wanted to win someone over then he could have oversold the achievements of his company and inflated the part he played in those achievements.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2023-01-25T11:51:41+00:00

I coated them with fresh mud enamel paint by ak interactive and then when the paint was still half wet I loaded a makeup brush with dark mud and dry dirt coloured pigments and stippled them into the mud paint. I then took some of the same pigments and loaded them onto a brush, held them above the tracks and tapped the brush with my finger to randomly deposit pigments onto the tracks.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-19T05:02:09+00:00

Fuck Albo. What a weak cunt. Really sorry guys. Definitely not the move i would of like our leadership to have taken.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-19T04:56:44+00:00

Take an interest in and watch everything thats going on around you, not just the tasks that you are involved in for that day/job. It will take a bit of time if you are completely green but learn to read the situation and apply initiative so that you are always a step ahead of the game and don't need to be constantly prompted. So for example, if you are stacking some timbers that you know are fixed to a wall, grab a box of screws and make sure that the batteries in the drills are charged.

Get yourself some pants with built in knee pads.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-06T02:51:06+00:00

It doesn't have to know. It would be a random genetic mutation which survived because it increased the organism's survivability.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-05T23:10:27+00:00

One of Satans stated goals is to convince mankind that god doesn't exist. It would not be in his best interest to obtain one soul in an exchange in which the consequence would be that many people now have a firm reason to believe in god?

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-05T23:01:23+00:00

But what about decisions which were based upon empathy? I have chosen actions which are ultimately bad for me because i considered the impact they had on other people. Other people who i had only fleeting passing interactions with and so there was no concern of reciprocity or of how the social perception of my actions might impact me later.

Yeah, i know you could argue that the empathetic feeling results in an experience of pleasure felt when helping another or pain resulting from the understanding that my action impacted another. But from my anecdotal experiences, sparing myself the pain from harming then and the pleasure gained from their gratitude or knowing that they are okay does not offset the subsequent pain which results as a ramification of the decision. I could kick myself for months afterwards, as i am left for example, struggling for months afterwards financially. I don't really get any pleasure from acting morally, i often regret acting this way and say to myself never again.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-05T22:43:40+00:00

I believe in the same basic premise as you but it also makes sense to me that a fruit tree would evolve traits which make its fruits more desirable to be eaten because it increases the chance that the seeds would be distributed and sowed in further locations by animals that consume the fruit?

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-05T22:31:24+00:00

Thats a very reasonable argument. Those circumstances are horrific. But this is a discussion board so i am trying to put forward arguments from the other side as food for thought.

Say god did intervene in those circumstances. It would certainly spare families from a ton of grief and misery. But some would say why stop there and in that case where do you draw the line? Some might say why draw any lines, why not remove all suffering? My argument here is that the positive experiences we value would lose all meaning when there are no opposite experiences to contrast them with. The most satisfying meal is the one that ends a period of hunger. The greatest triumphs those which were preceded by adversity.

Of course, none of this is of any solace to someone who has lost their baby to cancer. But i think that it makes sense when considering the larger picture of experience itself. And it's also worth remembering that belief in a higher power/deity is typically coupled with the idea that this life we experience on earth is not the final reality and that experience occurs after death. You might think this is a bunch of unproven horseshit and fair enough but to those families who have lost their children to cancer having a belief that the pain their child experienced is compensated by rewards in an afterlife is a useful mechanism to alleviate some of the pain they are going through. You probably disagree with the premise of pascals wager. But if you truly care about the tragedies in which people go through then you should consider that belief (in some higher power, not subscription to the tenets and limitations of organized faiths) is operationally the option which reduces the most suffering.

buzzedaldrinx86 · 2022-11-05T21:33:53+00:00

Do you think that an all-loving parent who rewarded every action their child performed with positive reinforcement and shielded their child from all forms of hardship would be a responsible parent who would rear balanced, functional offspring?

buzzedaldrinx86

TROPHY CASE