The Refuge of the Toads

#37201

substitute 'none' for 'all' - am I am saying just the opposite.

#37202

Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."

A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.

#37203

MarcusAu wrote:
John D wrote:
Faithful, loyal, reliable, resolute, sincere, conscientious, ardent, staunch, devoted, steadfast, dependable, scrupulous, obedient, truthful, loving, honorable, upright, dutiful, honest, trustworthy, firm, constant, straight, steady, fast, enduring, genuine, incorruptible, sure, tried and true, unswerving, unwavering, allegiant, attached, confiding

There is a lot to choose from. I think I like "allegiant". My sexual identity is "allegiant"... Yeah. I kinda like that.
Yes, but all of those descriptions could be be used to differentiate a poly from a non-poly lifestyle...necessarily.

Yeah... well... and gay used to just mean happy. Words end up with different meaning over time as they are used as a label. I think that an allegiant lifestyle is one of serial monogomy where a person ends an existing sexual relationship before starting another. My word choice... my definition.... haha.

#37204

Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.

Yup. Overseas products are more expensive, making local products a better value. It also encourages tourism.

There are pluses and minuses to a weaker currency.

#37205

John D wrote: Faithful, loyal, reliable, resolute, sincere, conscientious, ardent, staunch, devoted, steadfast, dependable, scrupulous, obedient, truthful, loving, honorable, upright, dutiful, honest, trustworthy, firm, constant, straight, steady, fast, enduring, genuine, incorruptible, sure, tried and true, unswerving, unwavering, allegiant, attached, confiding

There is a lot to choose from. I think I like "allegiant". My sexual identity is "allegiant"... Yeah. I kinda like that.

And just like that I'm wondering why nobody has written a teen dystopia trilogy with a sexual orientation caste system as the main plot device.

#37206

John D wrote:
Yeah... well... and gay used to just mean happy. Words end up with different meaning over time as they are used as a label. I think that an allegiant lifestyle is one of serial monogomy where a person ends an existing sexual relationship before starting another. My word choice... my definition.... haha.

Well, I could see why intolerant reactionaries such as yourself would have trouble fitting in with the current A/S conference scene. :)

#37207

John D wrote: Yeah... well... and gay used to just mean happy. Words end up with different meaning over time as they are used as a label. I think that an allegiant lifestyle is one of serial monogomy where a person ends an existing sexual relationship before starting another. My word choice... my definition.... haha.

The difference betwen you and Jim is that you wouldn't force your lifestyle onto others.

#37208

"we have to dig a deep chasm in the heart of atheism, detonate a few nukes inside it to widen it, and fill it with molten lava" PZ Myers, "The Happy Atheist", 2016.

Isn't lava that's not molten just... rock?

#37209

jet_lagg wrote:
"we have to dig a deep chasm in the heart of atheism, detonate a few nukes inside it to widen it, and fill it with molten lava" PZ Myers, "The Happy Atheist", 2016.
Isn't lava that's not molten just... rock?

Geology is a social construct. If rock identifies as lava, then it's lava.

#37210

Pound goes up:
Brexiter: See! See! It shows how the EU was holding us back!
Brextier: A-ha! After first panic, its calming down and we're winning, there you have it.

Reality update: nope.

Pound goes down:
Brexiter: Those grapes are sour, don't want them anyway.
Brexiter: Actually things going down really means things go up.
Brexiter: Cannot be decided now anyway!

Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.

Stock Market:
Same as above.

#37211

Kirbmarc wrote: Look, if you want to say that the US have underestimated Putin's resourcefulness into avoiding an open war, then I agree with you. If you're saying that Russia can't help itself to invade, and was "baited" into war, then you can justify everything with "baiting", even the actions of Islamic State, by saying that they were "baited".

Dumb moves are dumb. Perhaps I should not have said baited but it sure looks like it to me. The situation with ISIS is complicated. It looks as if they are getting support from one branch of the US, directly or indirectly ... as long as they are in Syria but not in Iraq.

Speaking of ISIS, and in the same breath dumb moves, for some reason a whole bunch of them (reports are all over the map 200-400-600) cars filled with ISIS fighters (and some with their families) retreating from Fallujah got blown to bits from the air. By US and "Iraq" air forces.

For some reason they seemed to have thought that they had a pass. Why would they think that?

Anyway, sun is up. Way past my bed time. Gnight all.

#37212

Kirbmarc wrote:
jimhabegger wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
We really don't need a new identity. "Prude" is enough. ;)
I wonder ... do you think that would work in career feminism and social justice circles?

"I identify as a prude. Disapproving of promiscuous sex is not a choice. It's part of who I am, part of the core of my inner being. If you keep promoting polyamory, you'll be denying my very existence, and you'll have my suicide on your conscience."
It works with sex-negative feminists.

I should have known that someone already thought of that!

#37213

John D wrote:My sexual identity is "allegiant"... Yeah. I kinda like that.

Me too!

#37214

Kirbmarc wrote:
John D wrote: Yeah... well... and gay used to just mean happy. Words end up with different meaning over time as they are used as a label. I think that an allegiant lifestyle is one of serial monogomy where a person ends an existing sexual relationship before starting another. My word choice... my definition.... haha.
The difference betwen you and Jim is that you wouldn't force your lifestyle onto others.

That insinuation about me is false.

#37215

Kirbmarc wrote:
John D wrote: Yeah... well... and gay used to just mean happy. Words end up with different meaning over time as they are used as a label. I think that an allegiant lifestyle is one of serial monogomy where a person ends an existing sexual relationship before starting another. My word choice... my definition.... haha.
The difference betwen you and Jim is that you wouldn't force your lifestyle onto others.

Yeah. I am comfortable with everyone deciding how they wish to behave. I always told my girls that I recommend having a life partner rather than just having sex for just the entertainment value. Being "allegiant" works for me. Sex has a purity element to it for me. It is just what I am. Still, when my girls started doing the "sex for entertainment" stuff, I didn't tell them they were bad people. They are finding their way. I just reminded them to be safe.... and I hope they are happy.

I will say that my poly daughter and I had lots of discussions about jealousy and resentment in her poly relationship. She always told me there was no problem with this... but her secondary poly "heart-friend" eventually broke up with her. I think they broke up with her because they really wanted a full-time "allegiant" style relationship.

#37216

I had no strong opinion on Brexit up to the very day it was decided.

But the noise being made my the Bremainers is just insufferable. I hope you don't think you're swaying anyone to your side with this.

Anyway, as it's not possible to put mods on ignore and as I'm sick of scrolling past giant whiny walls of text on Brexit, I'm just gonna take a little Pit vacation.

#37217

feathers wrote:
deLurch wrote:
Richard Carrier wrote:The only comments that will be published at this site are comments submitted by my Patreon subscribers and by anyone who or whose work I discuss in the article commented on (and please identify yourself so I know that). But anyone may email me about errors of fact requiring correction. Most other communications will be ignored.
You can support or show your appreciation for my work with a one time donation through PayPal or by becoming a regular Patron (for even just a dollar a post, and you only pay for substantive articles, not news and announcements). You can also follow me on Twitter or Facebook. I publish on many subjects including philosophy, ancient history, critical thinking, counter-apologetics, and social issues, including politics, feminism, and polyamory. Patrons may also message me on Patreon to make requests and recommendations for articles and topics to cover (or cover more often) or to pose questions for answering on my blog.
For more ways to support or benefit from my work, from taking my online classes to buying my books in any format, see How to Help.
So now you must PAY Richard on patreon in order to comment on his blog, or be the person's work who is being criticized. Quite a shift for your intellectual artillery.
He'd better book some extra bandwidth with his hosting provider then, to accommodate the influx of comments.
:bjarte:

Plus an auto-translator for Polish and Chinese. :twatson:

#37218

Peezus wrote:The FBI’s decision has come down: there was no “intentional misconduct” in Hillary Clinton’s email. Can we all just put this aside now? There’s a giant shrieking Cheeto on fire over in the Republican camp, and every racist in the country is plotting to use it to start an even bigger fire. Why are we focusing once again on a ‘controversy’ ginned up by right-wing liars?

http://archive.is/YS3Z6

#37219

gurugeorge wrote:Re. the Clinton thing, here's a vid juxtaposing Clinton's statements with the FBI's findings. It's interesting to see someone straight-up lying like this, in the sense of, now we know exactly what she looks like when she's lying. Weird.

http://reason.com/reasontv/2016/07/05/h ... -email-sca

It's just a stupid lie, instead of something related to national security, but my favorite piece of Hillary bullshit (which I raised as a counter example at lunch yesterday) was when she claimed to have been shot at by a sniper in Bosnia. It was a completely useless and irrelevant claim. And it was also completely untrue.

#37220

deLurch wrote:
Karmakin wrote:A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.
Yup. Overseas products are more expensive, making local products a better value. It also encourages tourism.

There are pluses and minuses to a weaker currency.

大多加 (但不要告诉德国)

#37221

Some of you are starting to remind me of US politicians who bring snow-balls onto the Senate floor to disprove global warming.

#37222

AndrewV69 wrote:Speaking of ISIS, and in the same breath dumb moves, for some reason a whole bunch of them (reports are all over the map 200-400-600) cars filled with ISIS fighters (and some with their families) retreating from Fallujah got blown to bits from the air. By US and "Iraq" air forces.

Retreating? Where to? Riyadh?

For some reason they seemed to have thought that they had a pass. Why would they think that?

Objection, y'r honour. Speculation.

#37223

https://i.sli.mg/0OVk2W.jpg

#37224

AndrewV69 wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Look, if you want to say that the US have underestimated Putin's resourcefulness into avoiding an open war, then I agree with you. If you're saying that Russia can't help itself to invade, and was "baited" into war, then you can justify everything with "baiting", even the actions of Islamic State, by saying that they were "baited".
Dumb moves are dumb. Perhaps I should not have said baited but it sure looks like it to me. The situation with ISIS is complicated. It looks as if they are getting support from one branch of the US, directly or indirectly ... as long as they are in Syria but not in Iraq.

Speaking of ISIS, and in the same breath dumb moves, for some reason a whole bunch of them (reports are all over the map 200-400-600) cars filled with ISIS fighters (and some with their families) retreating from Fallujah got blown to bits from the air. By US and "Iraq" air forces.

For some reason they seemed to have thought that they had a pass. Why would they think that?

Anyway, sun is up. Way past my bed time. Gnight all.

IDK, If surrendering is not an option and you've got to beat a tactical retreat across a desert, you don't have a lot of options when it comes to transportation. At least in a car, you can die with the AC on.

#37225

deLurch wrote:
Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.
Yup. Overseas products are more expensive, making local products a better value. It also encourages tourism.

There are pluses and minuses to a weaker currency.

There are no local products. No steel industry, no car industry (that matters), no manufacturing industry on any scale that could provide anything like the needs of 60million people. In case people forgot Thatcher and Blair saw to the demise of all that shit and pandered to the Chinese by letting them flood the market with made in China crap. No skills to instantly start such stuff up again, no investment potential for anyone to want to sink money into, no resources available locally to make anything anyway. I guess there is the plane manufacture industry, can't see Fred from Colne being that keen to buy one though, when all he really wants is a cheap TV to watch the Corro Street on.

The UK became a service economy. Construction was the next biggest, but now no one has any money to build anything, and everyone is going to hold off doing anything until Brexit is all sorted in 5,6,7 years time even if they did have the money. Research was quite strong, but of course relied on EU money, so bye to that one. The biggest industry was finance, and that's all packing up and pissing off. The only thing on the up will be prices and inflation.

As for tourism, if you think flogging fish and chips with vinegar to the Tower of London tourists is going to make up for the destruction of the finance sector... well before the 23rd of June I would have called you an idiot, but now Brexiter has the same connotation.

#37226

Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.

dollarbog.jpg: (64 KiB) Downloaded 160 times

#37227

https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/ ... _chart.gif
All things being equal I can't see how a weaker currency is good for the UK. Even assuming it will disproportionally impact "the wealthy" there has got to be a trickle-down effect.

#37228

So apparently the review embargo for the new Ghostbusters has been pushed up to the evening of the movie release (i.e., people will already be in theaters to watch it). Always a sign of a quality movie, that.

#37229

Lsuoma wrote:
Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.

dollarbog.jpg

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016070 ... 65c1f8.jpg

I think the value of my British coins is going up.

Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk

#37230

HunnyBunny wrote:
deLurch wrote:
Karmakin wrote:A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.
Yup. Overseas products are more expensive, making local products a better value. It also encourages tourism.

There are pluses and minuses to a weaker currency.
There are no local products. No steel industry, no car industry (that matters), no manufacturing industry on any scale that could provide anything like the needs of 60million people. In case people forgot Thatcher and Blair saw to the demise of all that shit and pandered to the Chinese by letting them flood the market with made in China crap. No skills to instantly start such stuff up again, no investment potential for anyone to want to sink money into, no resources available locally to make anything anyway. I guess there is the plane manufacture industry, can't see Fred from Colne being that keen to buy one though, when all he really wants is a cheap TV to watch the Corro Street on.

The UK became a service economy. Construction was the next biggest, but now no one has any money to build anything, and everyone is going to hold off doing anything until Brexit is all sorted in 5,6,7 years time even if they did have the money. Research was quite strong, but of course relied on EU money, so bye to that one. The biggest industry was finance, and that's all packing up and pissing off. The only thing on the up will be prices and inflation.

As for tourism, if you think flogging fish and chips with vinegar to the Tower of London tourists is going to make up for the destruction of the finance sector... well before the 23rd of June I would have called you an idiot, but now Brexiter has the same connotation.

Add to that rising commodity prices due to the weak pound (if not produced in the UK) and it's not looking good. I think it's been said before: the next hammer will fall the moment Art. 50 is invoked and then once again when the exit is complete.

#37231

OK, UK shitlords. Here's some fun cultural appropriation to cheer you all up!

[youtube]kjUJNvU4xn4[/youtube]

#37232

And for those of you who prefer Legs & Co:

[youtube]yWIwSKlB3uE[/youtube]

#37233

Cnutella wrote:So apparently the review embargo for the new Ghostbusters has been pushed up to the evening of the movie release (i.e., people will already be in theaters to watch it). Always a sign of a quality movie, that.

Feig pissed me off enough it will be nice to watch this damage his career. On a non sadistic level though, I just want him kept clear of any more classic properties. Running a multi billion dollar franchise into the ground should accomplish that

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

#37234

22 billion ( dollars, do your own conversion to chickens or quatloo's or whatever you people use) was spent last year by foreign tourists in Britian. Not exactly slinging fish and chips.

Top gear had an episode where they gathered vehicles and equipt. manufactured in the UK. It was an impressive array.

Right now the market is down, that's to be expected with all the uncertainty in the air. Quality companies will ride out the storm and be fine, foreign money will return if there is money to be made.

A nation with the fifth largest economy in the world,( second largest in the EU) certainly has resources to draw upon.

The EU is currently propped up by the stronger economies of Germamy, UK, France, etc. what happens when the poorer counties economies melt down again? I would think that would be the bigger long time issue. In the long run the UK might be better without those albatrosses around their neck.

#37235

feathers wrote:
deLurch wrote:
Richard Carrier wrote:The only comments that will be published at this site are comments submitted by my Patreon subscribers and by anyone who or whose work I discuss in the article commented on (and please identify yourself so I know that). But anyone may email me about errors of fact requiring correction. Most other communications will be ignored.
You can support or show your appreciation for my work with a one time donation through PayPal or by becoming a regular Patron (for even just a dollar a post, and you only pay for substantive articles, not news and announcements). You can also follow me on Twitter or Facebook. I publish on many subjects including philosophy, ancient history, critical thinking, counter-apologetics, and social issues, including politics, feminism, and polyamory. Patrons may also message me on Patreon to make requests and recommendations for articles and topics to cover (or cover more often) or to pose questions for answering on my blog.
For more ways to support or benefit from my work, from taking my online classes to buying my books in any format, see How to Help.
So now you must PAY Richard on patreon in order to comment on his blog, or be the person's work who is being criticized. Quite a shift for your intellectual artillery.
He'd better book some extra bandwidth with his hosting provider then, to accommodate the influx of comments.
:bjarte:

Narcissists gotta narciss.

#37236

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
free thoughtpolice wrote:I'm speculating here, but is it possible that the FTB ethics committee gave Trav Mamone a slight rebuke because his April post contained a questioning of the dogma, however timid and allowing "bad" people to comment and that is what caused his extreme apology?
The supposed offense was published in April.
Trav: If you are reading this don't let those self righteous assholes push you around.
Think about it. You have done your best, but still you aren't pure enough.
Assert yourself and feel good about choice. Change your nym to Tiger Mamone! :burn:
Trav has been the only internet SJW I've encountered who hasn't acted like a complete cunt. Yes, he's totally lost in the SJW dogma, but my impression is he's a decent fellow.

Yeah, and Trav actually engages with anti-SJWs and doesn't shy from calling out Islam (relatively). #notallSJWs

#37237

This guy is good.
[youtube]suGVpYZEBOs[/youtube]

#37238

Spike13 wrote:22 billion ( dollars, do your own conversion to chickens or quatloo's or whatever you people use) was spent last year by foreign tourists in Britian. Not exactly slinging fish and chips.

Top gear had an episode where they gathered vehicles and equipt. manufactured in the UK. It was an impressive array.

Right now the market is down, that's to be expected with all the uncertainty in the air. Quality companies will ride out the storm and be fine, foreign money will return if there is money to be made.

A nation with the fifth largest economy in the world,( second largest in the EU) certainly has resources to draw upon.

The EU is currently propped up by the stronger economies of Germamy, UK, France, etc. what happens when the poorer counties economies melt down again? I would think that would be the bigger long time issue. In the long run the UK might be better without those albatrosses around their neck.

22 billion is 8% of the economy of the UK. It is all but akin to slinging fish and chips in the big picture.

Anyway, it's all fine. Those 5 property funds that have halted trading aren't a biggy, what's a few hundred billion when you have control over the shape of cucumbers. And old people always moan about their pensions not going far enough, a bit more won't matter. And the fact that the government owned RBS has 28 billion invested in Commercial Property Equity, which is over 60% of the bank's equity, small change, taxpayers had no probs funding RBS last time round. The current banking stock crisis? Nobody likes bankers anyway.

#37239

Cnutella wrote:So apparently the review embargo for the new Ghostbusters has been pushed up to the evening of the movie release (i.e., people will already be in theaters to watch it). Always a sign of a quality movie, that.

That answers my question.

#37240

The last two or three times someone tried to unify Europe the UK stayed out, it worked out pretty good for them then, it might just work out for them again.

#37241

Spike13 wrote:22 billion ( dollars, do your own conversion to chickens or quatloo's or whatever you people use) was spent last year by foreign tourists in Britian. Not exactly slinging fish and chips.

Top gear had an episode where they gathered vehicles and equipt. manufactured in the UK. It was an impressive array.

Right now the market is down, that's to be expected with all the uncertainty in the air. Quality companies will ride out the storm and be fine, foreign money will return if there is money to be made.

A nation with the fifth largest economy in the world,( second largest in the EU) certainly has resources to draw upon.

The EU is currently propped up by the stronger economies of Germamy, UK, France, etc. what happens when the poorer counties economies melt down again? I would think that would be the bigger long time issue. In the long run the UK might be better without those albatrosses around their neck.

What resources?

#37242

Aneris wrote:Pound goes up:
Brexiter: See! See! It shows how the EU was holding us back!
Brextier: A-ha! After first panic, its calming down and we're winning, there you have it.

Reality update: nope.

Pound goes down:
Brexiter: Those grapes are sour, don't want them anyway.
Brexiter: Actually things going down really means things go up.
Brexiter: Cannot be decided now anyway!

Karmakin wrote:
Sunder wrote:I remember when Krugman would mock conservatives for obsessing over a falling dollar. Because it literally came down to thinking "weakness is bad ergo a 'weak' currency is always bad."
A weak pound tends to help the sort of industrial/manufacturing class that were a large part of the Brexit vote to begin with.
Stock Market:
Same as above.

You ooze with too much disdain for the dumbest things a brexiter might argue/ in lieu of contending with brexit's strongest points. I find it easy to cast you in the role of an EU that was deaf to the grievences of britain's brexit-class. Thus they were wise to break-up with you, rather than acquiesce to your authority.

#37243

Would be nice if one of our resident Septics could explain the nature of the controversy over their 2nd amendment. The wording goes thusly, I believe: "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Now call me simplistic, but how can you pretzel your way out of the last bit? You can argue about the meaning of "well regulated" and whether or not a militia is implicitly a citizen army. You can't argue, reasonably at least, about the meaning of the last bit. It is as explicit as it gets. Do you really have illiterate judges?

The reason this has come up as an issue for me is that I find myself becoming more and more irritated with the general intolerance to nuance and even fact on the part of the gun control fans in the liberal atheist/skeptic/science community. Although I've always been pro gun control myself, I'm finding it harder and harder to find a clear cut objective basis for gun control. Even the notion of an armed citizenry holding the government to account no longer seems as absurd as it once did because the simple fact is that it is a lot harder to ride roughshod over the rights of the citizenry when they are armed. The threat of armed resistance is probably sufficient in most cases to cause authoritarians in positions of power to reconsider as nobody in a democracy wants to be the one who started a gunfight with the citizenry.

#37244

Service Dog wrote:
Aneris wrote:Pound goes up:
Brexiter: See! See! It shows how the EU was holding us back!
Brextier: A-ha! After first panic, its calming down and we're winning, there you have it.

Reality update: nope.

Pound goes down:
Brexiter: Those grapes are sour, don't want them anyway.
Brexiter: Actually things going down really means things go up.
Brexiter: Cannot be decided now anyway!

Stock Market:
Same as above.
You ooze with too much disdain for the dumbest things a brexiter might argue/ in lieu of contending with brexit's strongest points. I find it easy to cast you in the role of an EU that was deaf to the grievences of britain's brexit-class. Thus they were wise to break-up with you, rather than acquiesce to your authority.

But what are brexit's strongest points? And who makes up the "brexit-class"? Boris "The Eton-mess" Johnson or poor Fred from Colne?

And thankyouverymuch for deciding on the issue, anyway. No more need for discussion, f-f-f-f-f-ffffolks. Service Dog decided the matter.

#37245

Some people are more than tired of the EU's overall control of what had been, until the EU, local matters. Right now I'm thinking mostly of food and bike stuff. Especially with the over-enthusiastic "ecological" stance.

#37246

Oh, man. We aren't going to have a "meaning of the 2nd Amendment" discussion, are we? That's a serious can of worms. In any event, it sounds like you've come across the idea that the 2nd Amendment was a guarantee that the public would never be out-gunned by the gov't, such that even a fully-functioning tank or jet fighter should be legal these days. This was close to the way it was as recent as the 1930s.

I'm actually quite sympathetic to that reading of the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I'm not in favor of that being the law in the US, but I can see the point of those arguing this. I will definitely say that I'm sick of hearing about hunting in any discussion of this.

#37247

The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

#37248

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

Frenchie has it right for once:

https://store.afa-online.org/images/P/stickr_17230.jpg

#37249

https://i.sli.mg/6JNCHG.jpg

#37250

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

In a few words, yes. But some interpret the text as implying that "the people" should never be out-gunned by the gov't, such that "the people" could over-throw their own gov't at any time. Thus, the argument is that all laws placing any restrictions on weapons (maybe with the proviso that they not have a record) are unconstitutional, so anyone should be able to own and carry fully-automatic assault rifles, own a tank, etc.

#37251

Eskarina wrote:
What resources?

Surely there has to be something standing between the current standard of living and post apocalyptic wasteland and cannibalism. One would think the UK was Greece or Bulgaria or something.

#37252

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

We have the right to bear arms... No head no body just bear arms

#37253

HunnyBunny wrote:
There are no local products. No steel industry, no car industry (that matters), no manufacturing industry on any scale that could provide anything like the needs of 60million people. In case people forgot Thatcher and Blair saw to the demise of all that shit and pandered to the Chinese by letting them flood the market with made in China crap. No skills to instantly start such stuff up again, no investment potential for anyone to want to sink money into, no resources available locally to make anything anyway. I guess there is the plane manufacture industry, can't see Fred from Colne being that keen to buy one though, when all he really wants is a cheap TV to watch the Corro Street on.

The UK became a service economy. Construction was the next biggest, but now no one has any money to build anything, and everyone is going to hold off doing anything until Brexit is all sorted in 5,6,7 years time even if they did have the money. Research was quite strong, but of course relied on EU money, so bye to that one. The biggest industry was finance, and that's all packing up and pissing off. The only thing on the up will be prices and inflation.

As for tourism, if you think flogging fish and chips with vinegar to the Tower of London tourists is going to make up for the destruction of the finance sector... well before the 23rd of June I would have called you an idiot, but now Brexiter has the same connotation.

You have accurately described the flabby state of Britain's economy. But all-that is a reason why Brexit is necessary. Telling a morbidly obese person that the road to becoming healthy is longer & harder than they realize-- isn't a good reason for them to give-up trying. Entirely the opposite: it underlies why change is so vitally important. Yes, the dealmakers best-equipped to build a sustainable national economy-- are currently whores for a finance industry which enriches their individual yuppies asses-- at the expense of their countrymen. Good riddance to international finance whorehouse. The finance yuppies can now re-ignite britain's native industry-- or else watch their standard of living plummet.

Look at Japan's post-80's boom 'lost decade'. The former fatcats who languished did-so because they kept waiting for the boom to come back on-it's-own. If they foresaw that it wasn't coming, they could have immediately turned-their-attention to retooling themselves for smaller-but-solider local prosperity.

#37254

Dave wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

Frenchie has it right for once:

https://store.afa-online.org/images/P/stickr_17230.jpg

A lot of guns and/or gunowners in Switzerland I am told. (Not a lot of hunting arguments there as the only edible wildlife is adorable dogs with small barrels of cognac.) Is there a particular historical reason for it, Kirbmarc?

#37255

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Some people are more than tired of the EU's overall control of what had been, until the EU, local matters. Right now I'm thinking mostly of food and bike stuff. Especially with the over-enthusiastic "ecological" stance.

You're saying that as if the EU is an alien government in a galaxy far, far away. :D It isn't, most of the regulations, even the cucumber and banana ones were initiated by single member states supported by others. WE are the EU and it up to us to make it what we want it to be, just like it is with our national governments., Most of us even can't be asked to vote anymore. In Germany we call it "Politikverdrossenheit" (being fed up with politics), and it's the reason we get the government we deserve.

What the EU needs first and foremost is transparency on how it works, very few people seem to have an actual idea of it.

Secondly, the EU needs to get rid off Juncker.

#37256

Spike13 wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?
We have the right to bear arms... No head no body just bear arms

Oops. Reading phail on my part, eh?

#37257

Service Dog wrote: You ooze with too much disdain for the dumbest things a brexiter might argue/ in lieu of contending with brexit's strongest points. I find it easy to cast you in the role of an EU that was deaf to the grievences of britain's brexit-class. Thus they were wise to break-up with you, rather than acquiesce to your authority.

I'd love to see someone presenting a detailed breakdown of their reasons for voting or against brexit. As of right now I've heard a lot of things, but it all seems vague and unclear to me.

What I've gathered from what I've read is this (a rough scheme):

REASONS FOR BREXIT:

Concerns about staying:

a) Concerns about the competition of EU workers vs. UK workers

b) Concerns about the lack of democratic representation within the EU

c) Concerns about EU spending of the UK

d) Concerns about the weak economy of some EU members.

Hopes about leaving:

a) Negotiation of market deals with other countries (emerging economies, etc)

b) Autonomy in economical and political decisions

c) More funds to internal projects

d) More jobs for local workers

REASONS FOR BREMAIN:

Concerns about leaving:

a) Concerns about the weakening of the financial market (due to the UK's, and especially London's, role as the financial hub of the EU)

b) Concerns about the weakening of exports to the EU due to less access to the common market

c) Concerns about the lack of EU investments in some key sectors (Thunderfoot's main reason for Bremain)

d) Concerns about the lack of skilled workers from the EU, or of cheap labor from the EU

Hopes for staying:

a) Possible re-negotiation of common market deals in more favorable terms

b) Maintaining solid EU institutions

c) Maintaining the number of EU jobs

d) Maintaining the amount of EU investments

If anyone who was on one side or the other of the debate has something to correct in this list please let me know.

#37258

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:The 2nd Amendment just means you have the right to arm bears, yes?

It's the right to bare arms, ie wear a t-shirt or roll your sleeves up.

#37259

Service Dog wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
There are no local products. No steel industry, no car industry (that matters), no manufacturing industry on any scale that could provide anything like the needs of 60million people. In case people forgot Thatcher and Blair saw to the demise of all that shit and pandered to the Chinese by letting them flood the market with made in China crap. No skills to instantly start such stuff up again, no investment potential for anyone to want to sink money into, no resources available locally to make anything anyway. I guess there is the plane manufacture industry, can't see Fred from Colne being that keen to buy one though, when all he really wants is a cheap TV to watch the Corro Street on.

The UK became a service economy. Construction was the next biggest, but now no one has any money to build anything, and everyone is going to hold off doing anything until Brexit is all sorted in 5,6,7 years time even if they did have the money. Research was quite strong, but of course relied on EU money, so bye to that one. The biggest industry was finance, and that's all packing up and pissing off. The only thing on the up will be prices and inflation.

As for tourism, if you think flogging fish and chips with vinegar to the Tower of London tourists is going to make up for the destruction of the finance sector... well before the 23rd of June I would have called you an idiot, but now Brexiter has the same connotation.

You have accurately described the flabby state of Britain's economy. But all-that is a reason why Brexit is necessary. Telling a morbidly obese person that the road to becoming healthy is longer & harder than they realize-- isn't a good reason for them to give-up trying. Entirely the opposite: it underlies why change is so vitally important. Yes, the dealmakers best-equipped to build a sustainable national economy-- are currently whores for a finance industry which enriches their individual yuppies asses-- at the expense of their countrymen. Good riddance to international finance whorehouse. The finance yuppies can now re-ignite britain's native industry-- or else watch their standard of living plummet.

Look at Japan's post-80's boom 'lost decade'. The former fatcats who languished did-so because they kept waiting for the boom to come back on-it's-own. If they foresaw that it wasn't coming, they could have immediately turned-their-attention to retooling themselves for smaller-but-solider local prosperity.

False analogy much? How is Britain "obese"? There was no problem (EU) to fix in the first place. If anything most economists agree that EU was the solution to the issues of globalism, not the problem.

#37260

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:Would be nice if one of our resident Septics could explain the nature of the controversy over their 2nd amendment. The wording goes thusly, I believe: "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Now call me simplistic, but how can you pretzel your way out of the last bit? You can argue about the meaning of "well regulated" and whether or not a militia is implicitly a citizen army. You can't argue, reasonably at least, about the meaning of the last bit. It is as explicit as it gets. Do you really have illiterate judges?

The reason this has come up as an issue for me is that I find myself becoming more and more irritated with the general intolerance to nuance and even fact on the part of the gun control fans in the liberal atheist/skeptic/science community. Although I've always been pro gun control myself, I'm finding it harder and harder to find a clear cut objective basis for gun control. Even the notion of an armed citizenry holding the government to account no longer seems as absurd as it once did because the simple fact is that it is a lot harder to ride roughshod over the rights of the citizenry when they are armed. The threat of armed resistance is probably sufficient in most cases to cause authoritarians in positions of power to reconsider as nobody in a democracy wants to be the one who started a gunfight with the citizenry.

Basically, pussies... The pussies are to blame.