Search results for query: *

Glad to see you boys are still around!

[Thinly-veiled Asiatic horde]

And what would that be?

My bad.

ColonicAcid said:

Okay and I've yet to understand as to how a tampon tax is equal to the exploitation, murder and attempted cultural genocide based purely on the belief of the "white man burden." All of these still have far reaching effects on both Indian society plus conflicts in both the middle east and Africa.

Care to explain to me? I must have missed the memo somewhere.

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the British Empire? How did you infer I was supporting imperialism? My point is that the E.U. is a bureaucratic morass where mostly unelected officials call the shots. You can say the European Parliament is democratic but even then post Lisbon all it takes is a French and German coalition to veto whatever the **** they want.

ColonicAcid said:

Ah yes there's that justification by pulling at straws.

Because as we all know, an empire is the same as the EU isn't it? Weird, I don't remember a sepoy mutiny in the EU, I must have missed it. 

Click to expand...

If you're not aware of how much of a political union the EU is becoming as a result of the Lisbon treaty then their plan is working.


Remember the tampon tax that the U.K. wanted to abolish as a result of campaigns from feminist groups? Cameron gave it to the E.U., where all 28 member states had to be in unanimous approval in order to remove it. Then it went to the Council of the European Union (not to be mistaken with the Council of Europe :^) )  where that request to scrap the tax was rejected. Instead, it was supposed to be "redirected to women's charities," after some processing fees for Brussels. Because it was being given to charities (something the British parliament was not consulted for) Brussels claimed they couldn't scrap the tax. After outrage they agreed to zero rate the tax. This process took over a year, and from my understanding they still haven't updated the rules to exempt tampons.

BenKenobi said:

No, I think the table had no colors at all. It was something like: How do you trust these? (and things ranging from foreign head of states to OECD or WTO).

Click to expand...

I think you may be talking about a Pew study done on Millennials. Too lazy to pull it up though.

Basically everything you'd expect. They tend to distrust the average person but also distrust the efficiency of the government. They don't trust corporations. They do trust NGOs and other stuff that would involve taking a really cool trip to Africa to take snapchats with orphans.


Demands for a second referendum are ****ing laughable and embarrassing on the part of anyone advocating for it. The referendum involved some of the highest voter turnout rates since 1992 and you're asking for another? I also heard Bernie needs more phonebankers. Come on guys, he can win this!

The arrogance and the indifference of the 18-24 demographic will never fail to **** them over.

Christ, the displays from some bootyblasted Remaineers have been shocking. When I see people claiming that "culture does not exist" and the fact that "everywhere is becoming like America" is a good thing, that is a sign steps need to be taken to repair the damage that has been done to peoples' identity.

IT'S


HIGH


NOON

Vraelomon said:

Not even sure if he's joking. I've never used I message before but I assume it acts as standard text messages

Click to expand...

I like the handwritten notes, but those "big" and "small" messages seem gimmicky.

This is the second time I've seen VICE embed with the Golden Division.


Unless there is some serious cheesing going on these guys seem great. They're moderate, compassionate, and good at fighting. Is there any move on the Iraqi government's part trying to model other military units off of them?

Ugh, that article you posted is terrible Adorno. Dismissive, combative, and regurgitating what your "political" family members at Thanksgiving say every year-tier.

This is one of the better articles I've read regarding Trump and, more importantly, how people like him thrive. It's a long article but it's a complex phenomenon.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html#

How well-preserved are Zoroastrian texts, again? They aren't practicing an incomplete religion right?

You look great Temujin! Don't stress about the psoriasis that everyone's too busy to notice. Remember the spotlight effect.


If you think public perception of people with crutches casts them as "freaks" I'd say you're wrong.

Maybe we've finally entered the Orwellian war system where special forces are the only ones doing any fighting.

Mage246 said:

Explain why this is relevant, without appealing to conspiracy theories.

Click to expand...

Laughable. Where there's smoke, there's fire, and you know that.'


Right, Goldman Sachs is donating to Clinton over Sanders because she "helped rebuild" New York after 9/11! :^)

I think Clinton won because she was an actual Democrat, and had the approvals of the leadership and the voters of the Party.

Statistically, Clinton voters are more likely to be Democratic ideologues with strong commitments to the party rather than liberalism, specifically. When one bases one's identity upon their political preferences it's no surprise they're going to be very defensive against an outsider like Sanders, who is going against the mythological and longtime leader that Clinton was.

Every Clinton voter I've encountered online and in person strongly identified with the Democratic party. People unimpressed by the Democrats aren't very likely to vote for her, because then she has hardly anything to offer -- Republicans hate Clinton because she's a Democrat but because she's Clinton (especially after Benghazi), and I expect more obstructionism to come her way than would happen in a Sanders presidency. Clinton's pragmatic appeal is illusory when she's really only a Party favorite above all else rather than a respected national figure.

As horrified as I am by some of Temujin's choices for citations and general naivete ("just give a third of the monthly cost of living to everybody! that'll have a huge impact on investment, r-right?")  he does have a more important point here and I would advise you all to be more constructive and approach it directly: these banks are engaging in risky behaviors with the money given to them, the irony of course being that this money was given in order to stabilize them.

What incentive does it have to not make risky investments (which is going to an elect few) when it's being subsidized with free handouts whenever it fails?

I'm going to delete facebook and its cousins pretty soon, personally.

Once you reach the echelons of having hundreds of "friends" posting dubious political opinions, humble brags/virtue signals, and general displays of social prestige, the whole charade gets very tiresome. I only use facebook as a news aggregator anymore -- does anyone know of an app that lets me consolidate headlines from various news sources?