Lurker > Balrog0

Leight_Weight posted...

not very good ones though

Huh?

the pics
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

not very good ones though




they are super cute. i want to keep the white and black one.
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

this is a good article that is actually interesting, sort of about this:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/11/eminem-kid-rock-macomb-county-politics-215700
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Zodd3224 posted...

Damn, I couldnt even win the letter Z... how many users have Z on this board, like 3?

I lost to someone who isn't here at all any more

But I think that's a sad story
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

cotham's is a local place known for their "hubcap" burgers:
http://www.cothams.com/menu.html

subway is an international sandwich chain that offers footlong sandwiches that are really only 11 inches long
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

it honestly doesn't matter, man

people get too hung up on how they compare to others

the main thing is to keep getting better yourself
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...

CDC report came out and said that 70% of Americans are overweight or obese. ALL Americans.

Think about that.

wow really

man
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

gl hf dd
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

No because it's objective - more accessible, higher quality.

okay, good, so the normative part of the argument is that you should do certain things (like making it free upfront) to increase accessibility and higher quality

pls posted...

I'm not sure government subsidized loans are the solution. In the US we have a huge student loan bubble because of government subsidies, and schools are just becoming degree mills to keep getting that sweet government cash.

They work in the UK, at least. I don't know about a bubble, the problem with loans here is that they are not targeted well based on income in addition to being too meager for those who really need them plus the way we administer the repayment plans is burdensome and costly for both individuals and government.

pls posted...

Imo the best solution is to stop treating college degrees as required when they're not required for most jobs that ask for them. That way people won't feel like they "need" a degree and we won't have to worry about everyone getting something regardless of whether or not they can afford it.

that's up to private businesses
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

alright
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

"Should" is never an argument, because normative statements are not arguments.

what a weird time to play semantics, when you just agreed charging prices makes things "better' (is that not a normative statement iyo?)

pls posted...

They are ideals that not everyone shares. Keep in mind that there is no such thing as free college - it might appear free at the time of service but there are costs for it. When something is "free" in matters that pertain to the government, you can bet there are indirect monetary and efficiency costs.

All of that is irrelevant to what I said, and what is presented in the abstract and article, though. It is implied in the word "loan" that you will pay it back (that counts as a cost FYI), which doesn't change the fact that the argument calls for government subsidized loans that are more generous than what the US has for reasons of quality and efficiency.

pls posted...

If quality and accessibility plummet, is it really even free education at that point? Or a massive waste of time instead?

No, but the argument is that quality and accessibility would suffer if college were not free upfront for those who are incapable of paying tuition on their own.
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

how can we be like a decade out from the trough of the most major recession since the great depression and people still use stocks as an indicator of a good economy?
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

This is not a surprise to anyone who understands basic economics. Offering "free" things tends to massively inflate the indirect costs, as well as reduce quality.

It's one reason why the UK's healthcare system is on the verge of collapse.

But another big part of the argument is that college should be free upfront, which is why lower income folks are offered much more generous loans and stipends than we get in the US
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Anteaterking posted...

So if I'm understanding the article properly, when college was free, UK colleges didn't have the money to accept lots of people, which led to them accepting less disadvantaged students?

that is part of the argument, yeah, that charging tuition for people who can pay it frees up more public resources for people who can't
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp503.pdf

Until 1998, full-time students in
England could attend public universities
completely free of charge. Two decades
later, most public universities in England
now charge 9,250 equivalent to about
$11,380, or 18% more than the average
sticker price of a US public four-year
institution.

Advocates of these reforms argued
that a free tuition system was regressive,
since the main beneficiaries were the
middle classes, and that without drawing
on private resources from those who
could afford to pay, the system would be
unable to meet rising demand. Instead,
universities would have to limit enrolment
slots, reduce per student spending or
both with low-income students and less
prestigious institutions most likely to bear
the consequences, potentially exacerbating
educational inequality...

First, public funding would bring in
more money for cash-strapped universities,
enabling them to take more students,
including the disadvantaged.

Second, requiring students to pay would
make the system fairer since previously
the main beneficiaries of free college were
students from middle and upper class
families.

Third, increasing resources would enable
the government to target assistance
to the neediest, who were struggling with
living expenses at college. Key to this was
the introduction of the income-contingent
loan for fees and maintenance, which
ensures that no student pays upfront and
enables large increases in liquidity at the
point of enrolment.

---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Despite increasing financial pressures on higher education systems throughout the world, many governments remain resolutely opposed to the introduction of tuition fees, and some countries and states where tuition fees have been long established are now reconsidering free higher education. This paper examines the consequences of charging tuition fees on university quality, enrollments, and equity. To do so, we study the English higher education system which has, in just two decades, moved from a free college system to one in which tuition fees are among the highest in the world. Our findings suggest that Englands shift has resulted in increased funding per head, rising enrollments, and a narrowing of the participation gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. In contrast to other systems with high tuition fees, the English system is distinct in that its income-contingent loan system keeps university free at the point of entry, and provides students with comparatively generous assistance for living expenses. We conclude that tuition fees, at least in the English case supported their goals of increasing quality, quantity, and equity in higher education.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w23888

kinda silly that you need to say it, but free college is inferior to college that costly, but which has generous progressive assistance based on income
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

on the other hand, I skipped class all the time in HS and the only real penalty was that you couldn't miss too many days or you would get an incomplete in the class. So that is not like how the admiral described hs anyway, since it meant I could avoid asshole classmates AND not go to school at the same time every day
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Sativa_Rose posted...

HS sounds like working in a factory. I work at a tech company and it feels a lot more like college when it comes to the freedoms I have.

yeah I was gonna say that, while I don't think either are perfect fascimilies of real life, the way the admiral described college is about as close to my work as the way he described high school is

I have a lot of leeway in what projects I pick up, I don't have a set time to come in, sometimes my job even requires I mingle at events where alcohol is present, if I don't like someone I just close my office door, etc
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

but, still, why dont the Koch brothers start funding Universities all across the nation?

they give a lot of money to existing universities, and they do basically own the law and economics departments at george mason u
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

these all still look black and blue to me
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

ThePrinceFish posted...

I can see portions of the black that could be seen as gold. But I will never understand how you could mistake the color blue for white.

same
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

_OujiDoza_ posted...

The Medicaid expansion, which accounts for a majority of the laws coverage gains, remains in place and is not vulnerable to administrative sabotage. Individual consumers are going to experience a lot of financial pain as a result of Trumps action. As premiums rise in response to the sabotage, the main public recourse will be to replace the Republican-led government with one capable of passing a workable and humane health-care law.

lol does this guy not even know about 1115 waivers?

https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/section-1115-medicaid-demonstration-waivers-a-look-at-the-current-landscape-of-approved-and-pending-waivers/

A number of states have waivers pending at CMS that include provisions not previously approved including work requirements, drug screening and testing, eligibility time limits, and premiums with disenrollment for non-payment for traditional Medicaid populations. Some of requests are part of expansion waivers, while others would apply to traditional populations.
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Howl posted...

Good Obamacare is a garbage healthcare policy.

your premiums will go up 20% in 2019 if the CSR payments stop
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/impact-of-cost-sharing-reductions-on-deductibles-and-out-of-pocket-limits/





---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

the thing is obama violated plenty of liberal principles too and largely liberals love him

[insert people raving about the difference between liberals and leftists here]

in any case what I hope everyone learns from 2016 - present it is that politics isn't about policies
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

coolboy11 posted...

HIV laws are stupid and an example of the "repeat" law phenomenon rampant in many state law books, there is usually a host of all types of shit you can charge an individual with the virus who with intentional knowledge spreads it around already on the books.

that is a good point, too, though
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Asherlee10 posted...

About the HIV Law:
The sentence max was downgraded because California believed HIV is a public health problem and therefore intentional transfer is therefore in line with all life long communicable diseases. It has no negative effect on the LGBT community. In fact by many in the community the penalty was seen as discriminatory upon it's enactment. There is an argument saying that HIV tolerability is gonna bring death sentences to people that contract it, but modern medicine has shown that is not the case and those statements are pretty ignorant as a whole to medical progress regarding the virus. You're much more likely to die from hep C intentional transfer which is also a misdemeanor.

that's kinda dumb, though, because arguably one of the reasons HIV leads to fewer deaths is that there was an aggressive campaign to promote prevention, which this law was a part of

maybe it wasn't an effective part of it but those facts alone don't really support the idea that the change in the law is sensible

to be fair, I assume they mean "more people die of hep c than HIV" which is true, rather than "if you contract hep c you are more likely to die than if you contract HIV" which I do not know enough about either thing to know if its true
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Darkman124 posted...

pretty much the answer to this is "we are a big tent and a lot of people care intensely about things others don't care about at all"

strong economic liberals are always going to support people who come out hard against economic conservatives; strong social liberals are not going to support those people if they say (even in art, rather than as a personal endorsement) things that are hostile to socially disadvantaged groups. basically it's a question of what they will look past, and what vindicates an undesirable position/what we are willing to align with.

it's part of the fundamental conflict of the party--we are not sure what policy we want at the helm. sanders came across as paying lip service but lacking the chops (despite a history of marching alongside those fighting for black rights and voting in favor of VAWA/gay marriage/etc--because he was small potatoes until his economic stance put him center-stage).

imo it's also why healthcare reform was so hard for us. half our voters don't really give a shit about it.

an actually interesting perspective, thank you

do you think the fact that he was a (white) man running against a woman played a role in setting that narrative about Sanders?
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

legendary_zell posted...

Leftists are criticizing him for things like the "we love our troops" line.

I haven't seen this at all, I pasted examples of what I saw
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

no seriously, uncut grass and trash in your yard are illegal in almost every place
you should ask what he'll do if they get a variance from the zoning board to add on an ADU adn rent it out to college kids or something. that's a more realistic problem
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

thats actually a lie, I wouldnt do shit, I would take advantage of the shitty neighborhood conditions until after the deal was closed so I could get the best price

then once there's a professional whitey in the neighborhood its pretty easy to clean it up, cops and code enforcement love us

im being facetious i wouldnt call 311
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

I mean I would just call 311 a lot
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

trash on the front lawn, cigarettes everywhere, paint chipped more than actual paint, torn screens, etc. the house is a shit hole.

oh and they have a 2015 Escalade parked out front, which makes it even funnier imo.

lol that is funny

that would all be subject to a 311 call where I live, though. I suppose it might take a while and maybe a few people complaining for someone to show up though
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

FireTemple posted...

I just don't understand how it would be feasible or beneficial even if it were legal. The work that would go into an insurance company setting up a network in another state might not be worth the cost and almost certainly couldn't do it cheaper than an already existing network in that state. I'm not basing this off any data though, that's just my speculation.

you are essentially correct

Antifar posted...

MonsterZed posted...

Why are we catering to insurance companies anyway when everyone seems to hate them?

They have money

in this case, I believe it is more state governments taht are worried cross-state policies would lead to a race to the bottom in terms of regulations and rules rather than insurance companies, which would probably like that
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

what may shock you is that methamphetamine actually makes many people better workers
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

and that's the power of freedom.

but now, you run the risk that your neighbor lets his house go to absolute shit, or does something like paint a giant penis on the front of it, and now your house is worth less and harder to sell.

I don't think you can get away with that any where because of obscenity or lewdness laws. And most cities have code enforcement that monitors for things like lawn care etc.

though as others have noted it is less of a certainty that they will have the capacity to actually enforce the codes than an HOA
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

s0nicfan posted...

I agree, some evidence that discrimination plays a huge part in it would be nice.

I guess we're at an impasse

on a serious note, the fact that all single mothers have a higher median income than all black women militates in favor of the fact that discrimination is a huge part of it at least to me
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

s0nicfan posted...

common fucking sense? Becoming a single parent in high school or early in college is going to generally make it harder to become a high roller.

I mean, my common sense tells me that discrimination plays a huge part in it so some evidence would be nice.

pls posted...

Getting a degree these days is very easy. Struggling with single parenthood impacts a career much more.

The median income for all single mothers is higher at 35k/yr than the median income for all black women at around 30k/year BTW
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

s0nicfan posted...

The reason they have the lowest median income has far more to do with parenthood problems than it does graduates being discriminated against.

source?
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

You can't think of even a single reason why single motherhood might affect income level?

I can, but ceteris paribus this would impact educational attainment, too. Are you capable of reading an entire post?

pls posted...

Maybe it's because child support benefits are higher if the mother's income is lower. Maybe it's because raising children on your own requires more of your time which leaves less time for developing your career. Careers are very demanding and you aren't going to get a large income just because you have a degree.

Hmm, the CTC and EITC are really useful for people who have above average incomes, actually. TANF and other public assistance does go down. I'm sure that explains part of it.

What else could it be?
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

That is because college does not guarantee a higher income. Income is determined by a wide variety of factors. The type of degree, the years of experience, the city you're working in, the industry you're in, negotiation skills, impact to the company, etc.

Seems like a non sequitur to suggest that a degree leads to a high income.

I mean, the bolded is pretty factual, even for black women compared to other black women without degrees, so I don't understand why you think they're unrelated.

pls posted...

And I think your response is a good example of why it's worrisome to treat "equitable outcomes" this way. You are no longer wanting fairness - you are wanting guaranteed and consistent outcomes for every single person. That is not the same as fairness, and that is where the issue lies in that organization we were talking about earlier.

No, I'm talking about large population averages, not individual cases. If education doesn't mean anything, why would you even bring up the fact that black women are better educated, btw?
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

s0nicfan posted...

I'm sure the massive rate of single motherhood has nothing to do with it.

I am interested in why you think that would matters with respect to income if it doesn't impact educational attainment, actually. All of the things that would reduce employment from single parenthood should reduce school outcome, too.
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

and yet black women continue to have the lowest median income despite their success in school

weird isnt it
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

Ammonitida posted...

That's good, because in earlier studies of this nature, ban-the-box policies significantly increased racial and gender disparities in callbacks.

that is why I don't support them, yes
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.

pls posted...

If the way that we implement that is by forcing outcomes to be equitable, then yes, that is immoral and would lead to the collapse of the entire country.

There are good ways and bad ways to achieve honorable goals. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

equitable and equal are not the same word and do not have the same meaning

equitable means fair, not the same

pls posted...

I think that a BLM leader is not just some random person in Missouri espousing their own wish list. This narrative is common throughout BLM and the left in general, as it is consistent with their ideals on wealth redistribution, wealth inequality, etc.

I mean, redistribution is, but the specifics of that list are not.

pls posted...

We must always interpret the undertones of an ideology in light of the entire ideology. In this case, BLM falls into what we can probably agree is the left, and we know a lot more about what the left wants. They want much more than just an education campaign where white people "acknowledge" some original sin of whiteness. That's just a precursor.

lmao @ original sin of whiteness. It's hard to take you seriously at this point.
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.