By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Dulfite on 25 February 2020
Runa216 said:
This entire thread reminds me of this:

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751&page=1

What started simply enough, as an inquiry about how often one should work out, somehow devolved into a 129 page argument about...how many days there are in a week, with such gems as 'A week is sunday to sunday, moron, that's 8 days' to 'two weeks is 15 days, retard' (They use slurs a lot over there). That is how this thread comes across to me, just people arguing over the basic tenets of speech, some people making shit up to prove their point, and lying to look good. There IS a right answer, but you'd never know it based on how people are acting and how tenuous people's attachment to reality can be.

I started to read through that thread and couldn't handle it haha.



Around the Network
EricHiggin on 26 February 2020
IvorEvilen said:
EricHiggin said:

I'm saying they shout it from the rooftops. There's plenty of people from the other side being quiet indoors who think the same. I'm sure some would like to proclaim it, but it would be overshadowed by a red hat, ironically.

So making fun of people with non natural different colored body parts is ok as long as it's not tied to their race or sex or gender? So if someone who's white, wears blackface, but doesn't do it for racial reasons, is that ok? What about orange and the connection to fruit, and referring to someone as a "fruit"? I'm concerned. Are they they implying Trump is gay? Are they saying that's a bad thing?

So breaking your own rules is ok as long as you're punching up? When else are the rules bendable if not breakable? How can we be sure those who use this to gain power will follow the rules once they are able to punch down?

I'm glad you see things that way, and I agree for the most part.

I don't think making fun of people for how they look is appropriate, period.  I'm simply stating it's not commentary on his race, and culturally that is seen as "not-so-bad".

Comparing black face to calling Trump "orange" is not exactly comparing apples... to oranges... (Buh-dum-tssh) Because of the cultural significance of black face in the US, a white person wearing blackface for any reason is ill-advised, at the very least.  It's too easy to misconstrue the intent, even if it was admirable.  You have to think about the act and the impact it can have on marginalized people.  And in the case of Trump, I don't think people with poor tanning preferences qualify as a marginalized people of significant interest, personally.

Regarding the "fruit" association... As a gay man, that is not an association I would ever naturally draw.  In fact, I know many gay men who refer to Trump as an "orange baboon" (take that as you will).  Now, if people were calling Trump a "fruit"... Or more relevantly, referring to Buttigieg as a "fruit", I would be pretty peeved.

Well I'd say Trumps been marginalized by others for quite some time now. It's one thing to critisize his policies but his skin? I was always under the impression the spray tan is because he was told he looked bad with his super pale natural skin. Applying something to one's skin to dress yourself up doesn't seem odd especially if it does better their appearance. If Trump is sensitive about his skin, so much so he always tans it, going after it is pretty harsh then. Maybe not blackface historical harsh, but it's what it does to the individual that's the concern. 

As a straight man who used to "get under the skin" of other straight men by calling them gay references back when it was typical and seen as more acceptable when we were young, and vice versa, I could see it. There's new gay slang I've heard since, that's used to get around the no no words nowadays. Considering the initial childish remarks here, I'd guess it meant fruit before I would assume it meant he's so full of himself that he always has to have a 'fancy' tan. The worst I've heard Pete called in person is a "delicate flower", and I thought straights were supposed to be the mean ones. Then again there is Milo. 

Not quite so bad still doesn't make it much better considering the skin attack. It references something else in the end that's meant to harm the individual which is wrong. Both of us seem to agree about that though. As for calling Trump an "orange baboon", I'd say that's pretty harsh as well. Just because he's white doesn't change what the reference means.

In the end my point is trying to bash an opponent by stooping to their level, as initially described, doesn't help the cause, and can actually just make it worse. If you want change, it starts with your own actions by following what the party preaches. 



Runa216 on 26 February 2020
Dulfite said:
Runa216 said:
This entire thread reminds me of this:

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751&page=1

What started simply enough, as an inquiry about how often one should work out, somehow devolved into a 129 page argument about...how many days there are in a week, with such gems as 'A week is sunday to sunday, moron, that's 8 days' to 'two weeks is 15 days, retard' (They use slurs a lot over there). That is how this thread comes across to me, just people arguing over the basic tenets of speech, some people making shit up to prove their point, and lying to look good. There IS a right answer, but you'd never know it based on how people are acting and how tenuous people's attachment to reality can be.

I started to read through that thread and couldn't handle it haha.

I didn't even make it 5 pages in. I FELT the stupid on my frontal lobe, beating me like a sledgehammer. 

So when people in this thread start saying things like "What Trump REALLY meant when he mocked Parasite for winning was ... blah blah blah international trade", I facepalm so hard it creates a singularity on my forehead. The mental gymnastics on some people is inspiring. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

EricHiggin on 26 February 2020
Hiku said:
EricHiggin said:

-Guessing at how I would respond? That is really reaching, no? It's one thing if you're concerned about something I've said, but being concerned about how I could have or may converse in the future? I'm not going to try and change how people converse with me by guessing how they would likely react to me in the future or another timeline if it's not in a manner that would benefit me. They can say whatever they want to me as long as the mods don't have a problem with it, and if there's a problem, I would hope it applies equally to everyone.

I said if someone guesses what you're referring to. And when users did (which they had to because you didn't specify), you kept telling them it was wrong, but not why.

EricHiggin said:
-I only suggested they should watch the clip after numerous explanations.

This is your only response on the subject before repeatedly telling people "You didn't watch the clip/do your homework"
https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9112114

You said "is based on what Tucker points out about China having such leverage".

Responses for that were met with "Nope that's not it. Watch the video/again."
At that point when people asked you to specify, you should, rather than be upset that someone potentially didn't look through an entire 11 min clip properly enough, or twice, to be able to pinpoint the few seconds of it you were referring to, and what your interpretation of it was.

I also asked you to specify the sentence from Tucker, but you still didn't.
So I'll just move on. But I don't want to hear that I'm misunderstanding something about it.

So now I can respond to your explanation from page 358.

EricHiggin said:
Well yes. More people expecting speedy, quality, services, would put more pressure on the system. It has nothing to do with what would be better in terms of having healthcare or not, it has to do with planning ahead. What's the point in free health care if you can't get it when you need it?

The point is, even under this unlikely scenario you portrayed where China manages to cut off supplies without US having backup providers ready to cover for it, more people still have access to healthcare than they would under the current system.

Let's pretend China cuts off penicillin, and there's no backup supplier.

Current system: A certain amount of people don't have access to penicillin.
Universal Healthcare: The same amount of people don't have access to penicillin.

However, those same people (and other people) can still get treatment for other medical conditions. Many of whom could not under the current system.

EricHiggin said:
You don't invest the majority of your money in a single unstable stock. You spread it out, even if you have a little more dedicated to one specific objective.Those suppliers could instantly fill the demand? If the cut off happened when a serious illness fell upon the world, or worse, would that be seen as acceptable? Waiting to fill the demand while people needlessly perish due to the wait because most of the eggs were placed into one basket?

This sounds more like criticism towards being over-reliant on a potentially unreliable medical supplier, and seems to have little to no relevance to Universal Healthcare.

Each country adjusts the supply and demand process according to the needs of people, so shortages of crucial medical aid should not be a thing.
The amount of people in the US who are uninsured or under-insured is dwarfed compared to the amount of people in the rest of the world that are fully insured. So it's not like USA joining the rest of the world with Universal Healthcare is going to throw everything into chaos.
If there's any actual indication that this would happen, I'd like to hear some concrete evidence that points to this before I'd speculate on the matter.

But I want to point out that Tucker Carlson suggested a problem without actually analyzing the situation he described.
What would happen if China cut off supplies? What are USA's options in such an event? He left that out completely, which is irresponsible and unprofessional at best. That's just fear mongering without any given probable cause.

A couple of weeks ago I was ordering medicine for my grandma since she's bad with technology. I had done it for years, but now for the first time it said something like "Not available in Sweden any longer. Please contact support." So I did. And they told me that all that means is that they'll order it from a different supplier. And the very next day I got a notice saying it was ready to pick up.

That's the only time in my life I ever heard or experienced anything close to what Tucker is suggesting here.

-You were guessing at how I would reply to something, and seemed to have a problem with how I could have, potentially, responded.

"And if someone guesses what you're referring to, chances are you'd reply with "Nope, that's not it. Watch the video again and you'll understand.""

I didn't say that, you did. I eventually later on, after trying to explain things a few times, end up suggesting they watch the clip, "where did you get that from? He nor I am under that impression. Maybe you should watch the clip." Considering as I've already mentioned to you, I didn't remember where exactly in the clip that portion was, it's up to me now to go back through it all and find it for them? They have no obligation to have an idea where they are coming from before they begin a conversation with anyone?

-----

-Incorrect. The first reply is to a different individual. The next reply, which is to another individual is, "you either didn't watch the clip or you didn't understand it based on that reply."

I don't tell them they have to watch the clip, I simply point out based on what they said, they didn't understand, possibly because they didn't watch the clip.

They follow up with this, "then enlighten me.  How does the leverage change given the product volume doesn't change?"

And I respond with, "the leverage, based clearly on what is said in the clip, has nothing to do with product volume. You obviously didn't do your homework, again, it seems."

What's wrong with my response? They asked another question about product volume and I explain it has nothing to do with that, which they would know if they watched the clip. Even you say you don't see the connection, so why would they if they watched it? (I'm not talking about the "clip" when I mention homework again, I'm referring to a fairly recent prior conversation with them btw)

Tucker is pointing out the leverage China has over America by being such an important supplier, in many ways. Then he specifies based on the point he's making. Is that what you're looking for?

-----

-I don't get it. I already explained it. "It has nothing to do with what would be better in terms of having healthcare or not, it has to do with planning ahead. What's the point in free health care if you can't get it when you need it?" What's not clear about that?

-----

-Tucker is just asking a question about a general what if scenario. You can't honestly tell me you think there's zero possibility that there could at some point, end up a shortage of medical supplies because of the reliance on China. Tucker didn't elaborate because he didn't have to. It's definitely possible, even if unlikely. So he has a point, even if you don't think it means much based on the likelihood. 



EricHiggin on 26 February 2020
SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

1). -I don't get it. I already explained it. "It has nothing to do with what would be better in terms of having healthcare or not, it has to do with planning ahead. What's the point in free health care if you can't get it when you need it?" What's not clear about that?

2). -Tucker is just asking a question about a general what if scenario. You can't honestly tell me you think there's zero possibility that there could at some point, end up a shortage of medical supplies because of the reliance on China. Tucker didn't elaborate because he didn't have to. It's definitely possible, even if unlikely. So he has a point, even if you don't think it means much based on the likelihood. 

1). So let's just have no healthcare at all.  Why bother, right?

2). Tucker is ONLY bringing this up because of M4A.  Why didn't he say shit about this before?  If it's not about M4A but merely leverage in general, why is it an issue now?  And why have you gone out of your way to bring up M4A in regards to the issue?

And we keep telling you (and Tucker) that we not as dependent on China for medical supplies as you two keeping claiming we are.  The top 40 medical equipment suppliers are all US, Euro and Japanese companies. And the top 25 medical supply chains are all US and Euro companies.

The only thing that China does have a strong hold on is the pharmaceuticals. They manufacture a lot of our medication. But we already have system sin place for that.  All major distributors in the US maintain several months worth of supplies in the event of a national emergency (war, trade, natural disasters, etc...) and they maintain lists of alternative manufacturers for all the critical and most commonly used medications.

So gain, it has shit all to do with China and everything to do with trying to make M4A look bad. 

Oh, and by the way, the one person that can harm our medical supply chain with China the most is Trump.  It's his trade war that births even the notion of a supply cut off from China.  But yeah....M4A. 

That's your opinion, based on what you've used to support it, and you're free to have and express it. Hopefully Tucker never get's to say I told ya so.



Around the Network
Runa216 on 27 February 2020
SpokenTruth said:
CaptainExplosion said:

Trump says the United States is "very ready" for the coronavirus. Then he appoints Pence to be in charge of the virus response.

These amoral idiots are gonna get millions of people killed. -_-

Very ready.....by having fired the U.S. Pandemic Response Team and cut the CDCs global disease outbreak prevention efforts by 80% 2 years ago.  And now putting a guy who believes the rapture is coming soon in charge of a pandemic response.

I'm waiting for Erighiggin to spin this into a positive so I can have my chuckle for the day. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

EricHiggin on 27 February 2020
Runa216 said:
SpokenTruth said:

Very ready.....by having fired the U.S. Pandemic Response Team and cut the CDCs global disease outbreak prevention efforts by 80% 2 years ago.  And now putting a guy who believes the rapture is coming soon in charge of a pandemic response.

I'm waiting for Erighiggin to spin this into a positive so I can have my chuckle for the day. 

You rang?..

3:19 - 3:42

2:22 - 3:48, if you want something to complain about after your chuckle.



EricHiggin on 27 February 2020
SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

You rang?..

3:19 - 3:42

2:22 - 3:48, if you want something to complain about after your chuckle.

Covid-19 pandemic response Topic |-------------------------------------|Eric's rebuttal.
EricHiggin said:
Runa216 said:

I'm waiting for Erighiggin to spin this into a positive so I can have my chuckle for the day. 

You rang?..

3:19 - 3:42

2:22 - 3:48, if you want something to complain about after your chuckle.

There's a clip where your gap is... I'm not going to bother guessing as to why you saw something else...

"I'm waiting for Erighiggin to spin this into a positive so I can have my chuckle for the day."



EricHiggin on 27 February 2020
SpokenTruth said:
EricHiggin said:

There's a clip where your gap is... I'm not going to bother guessing as to why you saw something else...

"I'm waiting for Erighiggin to spin this into a positive so I can have my chuckle for the day."

I know there is a video there.  And just like now I deleted it from the quote because it's not necessary in the quote.  I do that for a lot of things I quote to make reading easier instead of seeing a video reposted over and over again.  I even take my own videos out if I'm quoting someone that quoting me with a video.

Well, at least you didn't disappoint on the chuckle. The video was totally off topic which is why it elicited a chuckle.

I based my reply much more so on your words than how you removed the vid from the quote. I reposted the quote vid since I got scolded last time for not doing so, and not time stamping it. Had to do my due diligence.

Yes, it couldn't have worked out better. I had just watched the clip prior to pulling up VGC. It all came together so well that I couldn't help but laugh myself.

Nice for once for everyone to have a lighthearted chuckle, no?



Runa216 on 27 February 2020
SpokenTruth said:

You....you don't even get.  The reason.  The non-sequitur video.  Off topic. You. 


Back to the topic a bit, we are now learning that the test for Covid-19 may cost as much as $3,270.

Welcome to America! 

I genuinely wonder how Republicans/Trump/Conservatives can be so outright ignorant, stupid, and villainous and people still support them. Even if you trim away literally everything else Trump has done...this nonsense with how he's responding to the Coronavirus is...bafflingly bad. Like, it's so clearly obviously stupid. At first I wondered if maybe liberals were just exaggerating what he said or skipping out on details to make him look bad (Liberals do that, too; not as often as conservatives but they do it), but nope! 

Your US president is basically plugging his ears and going LALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU. 

Your President. 

The person people voted for. 

The person people chose to represent them. 

Is acting like a 3 year old who doesn't want to eat his broccoli. 

This is not how ANYONE in ANY position of power should EVER be acting under ANY circumstances. How he managed to make it to the highest seat in the land despite having the cognition of a child, the maturity of a teen, and the unearned confidence of a first-year psych major is absolutely baffling. And the fact that he's likely to get reelected in 2020 saddens me to know end. 

Seriously, at this point we might just need to shut the US down and turn it back on again if this is how things are going. (Canada has Doug Ford as the premier of Ontario, so we're not doing much better, and we almost voted in Scheer as PM - would have given he won the popular vote, but Trudeau won more seats.)



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android