Lurker > averagejoel

IfGodCouldDie posted...

averagejoel posted...

Squall28 posted...

CyricZ posted...

Not gonna lie.

First thoughts on this?

Half is good.

99% is better.

You guys are awful. They have no obligation to give any of their money away.

they shouldn't have that money to begin with

Why?

because that much wealth being concentrated in the hands of one person is... wait for it... bad
---

peanut butter and dick

assassingriskel posted...

averagejoel posted...

assassingriskel posted...

You mean give 25% of her ex's fortune to charity

she deserves that money every bit as much as he does

LOL hell no

(in case you couldn't tell, my point is that neither of them deserve it)
---

peanut butter and dick

jeffhardyb0yz posted...

CyricZ posted...

jeffhardyb0yz posted...

CyricZ posted...

Not gonna lie.

First thoughts on this?

Half is good.

99% is better.

THATs your first thought?

Do better humans

Hell, 99.9% is better.

That's 37 million she'd have left to work with.

One could even easily make the case for 99.99%.

Yes, I'm sure a lot of this is tied up in investments and businesses, but let's be real. Instead of Jeff and Mackenzie being one combined billionaire, we now have two billionaires.

A class of people we do not need more of.

2 billionaires with 1 of them giving up half of their fucking fortune. Do you know how hard would be for a lot of humans to give up $18 billion dollars, even if there is another 18 bill in their account? Ask the average 1%er to give up 50% of their fortune.

this is more an indictment of billionaires as a class of people than it is praise for her
---

peanut butter and dick

Squall28 posted...

CyricZ posted...

Not gonna lie.

First thoughts on this?

Half is good.

99% is better.

You guys are awful. They have no obligation to give any of their money away.

they shouldn't have that money to begin with
---

peanut butter and dick

Rusty_Shacklefo posted...

Shablagoo posted...

CyricZ posted...

Not gonna lie.

First thoughts on this?

Half is good.

99% is better.

Same

How much do you two give?

unless both of them are billionaires, your question is drastically missing the point
---

peanut butter and dick

assassingriskel posted...

You mean give 25% of her ex's fortune to charity

she deserves that money every bit as much as he does
---

peanut butter and dick

people have a weird conception that donating to charity means someone is a good person. they get tax exemptions for these donations! and a lot of wealthy people can just start their own charity that functions as a think tank to support their reactionary politics. that's how the Heritage Foundation came to be.

aside from that, she'll still be a billionaire.
---

peanut butter and dick

tigerslashII posted...

Guide posted...

I think the lowest figure I've seen was like 3.2 mil? An old article about a historian catching shit for going over the numbers even though he clearly had nothing against judaism.

There's very wide discrepancies over time, which lend credence to the fact the Soviet Union was lying. Sources as late as the 1960s say the number was around 8-9 million with Nuremberg testimonies citing virtually impossible numbers under the duress of interrogation, which many historians discount now, as that would have the total being well over 15 million. The number has steadily fallen to 6 million which it settled on in the late 80s to early 90s when the Holocaust came to mainstream attention again when Spielberg released Schindler's List.

please remember that the 6 million figure is only including jews. jews were not their only targets. the total including all of them is closer to 15-20 million
---

peanut butter and dick

oh man kerotan92. I remember him
---

peanut butter and dick

best arc in the anime tbh
---

peanut butter and dick

Blade-wolf posted...

It happened but I doubt very much the 6 million number.

the actual number, if you include the Nazis' other targets, is currently estimated at 15-20 million depending on the source.
---

peanut butter and dick

gunplagirl posted...

Tax evasion was my first thought when I saw the topic title but I remember there was more

Like stuff involving minors

I hadn't heard of anything involving minors, but I vaguely remember something about him... blackmailing one of his employees into licking his ass on video? I might be remembering wrong

anyway, he was just a generally bad dude
---

peanut butter and dick

Vicious_Dios posted...

God_Of_Entirety posted...

wait what happened with this guy antifar? last time I checked he posted porn dumps all the time. nows hes an activist of some sort

antifar literally just goes on twitter, news sites, and blogs all day just looking for random shit to be 'outraged' about and then regurgitates it all back here.

of all the sentiments I see in Antifar's posting, outrage is not one of them. or at least not one that stands out enough from any of his posts that I remember it
---

peanut butter and dick

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com./user.php?db=.5.user=thanks-gohan
---

peanut butter and dick

Gaylord

my cousin also knows someone whose name is Harry Dick, so there's that
---

peanut butter and dick

^I was unable to post that without including the space between the > and the link text. can you please remove it when you paste it to your website?
---

peanut butter and dick

<a href="http://error1355.com/ce/averagejoel.html"> http://error1355.com/ce/averagejoel.html</a>;
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

averagejoel posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

The issue is so big it's honestly making me not take anything you say seriously.

Put an openly black gay person into 1920s Germany and see what happens.

first: I was specifically talking about race here. sexual orientation is a different conversation.

second: put a black person into the US today and see what happens

Absolutely nothing?

Have you never seen a black person live their life before?

black people get murdered by police

they get put in prison for disproportionately small offenses

they can literally still be used for slave labour while they're in prison
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

The issue is so big it's honestly making me not take anything you say seriously.

Put an openly black gay person into 1920s Germany and see what happens.

first: I was specifically talking about race here. sexual orientation is a different conversation.

second: put a black person into the US today and see what happens
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

And you still seriously think they were less racist than we are today. Fuck man that makes me question our educational system even more now.

yes, pre-Nazi Germany was indeed less racist than the US is today. I have already established that. do you have any other issues with the post or are you going to get hung up on that one thing
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

1920s were 100 years ago dude

"No it was 99!!!"

I was talking about the years before the nazis took power. they were in power for most of the 30s.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

Lmfao

I see that poll you made. Hitler took power in 1933, so saying "Germany in the 20s-30s" is disingenuous.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

And you still seriously think the US is more racist now than Germany was then. That's amazing.

no.

I know that the US is more racist now than Germany was then.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

All of it?

You seriously think the US is more racist now than 1930s Germany?

I said 100 years ago. the 1930s were not 100 years ago. I'm specifically talking about Germany in the ~20 years before the Nazis took power.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

averagejoel posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

Because you're comparing two totally different social climates. I'd like to think we grew smarter and morally since then.

we didn't. the political climate now is very similar to what happened then. the US is way more racist now than Germany was 100 years ago, and it has a much more powerful military. anyone saying that it couldn't happen again is either ignorant or lying

the nazis didn't just go away. Hitler had many supporters in the US. many nazis came to the US. many of them worked in NASA or the CIA. many nazis had kids.

this is a post

which idea, specifically, do you take issue with?
---

peanut butter and dick

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

averagejoel posted...

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

I love all the comments about people only hearing about it due to YouTube deleting it. Good work

no, they're hearing about it because deupd posted a video about it to gamefaqs.

Which he never would have done if...

... he wasn't sympathetic to Lauren Southern?
---

peanut butter and dick

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

I love all the comments about people only hearing about it due to YouTube deleting it. Good work

no, they're hearing about it because deupd posted a video about it to gamefaqs.
---

peanut butter and dick

CloudChaser462 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

PrincessCadance posted...

What is it about?

The border crisis in Europe

Its sad that certain types still want to censor this.

the obvious solution is to abolish all borders
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

Because you're comparing two totally different social climates. I'd like to think we grew smarter and morally since then.

we didn't. the political climate now is very similar to what happened then. the US is way more racist now than Germany was 100 years ago, and it has a much more powerful military. anyone saying that it couldn't happen again is either ignorant or lying

the nazis didn't just go away. Hitler had many supporters in the US. many nazis came to the US. many of them worked in NASA or the CIA. many nazis had kids.
---

peanut butter and dick

TomNook20 posted...

Milo was given two huge platforms to speak, and when people heard what he had to say no one wanted anything to do with him. Bad choice for an example.

that's not true. he started falling off the map when he was banned from twitter
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

Nazis have bigger platforms when they go unchallenged.

[citation needed]
---

peanut butter and dick

one of the issues with debating nazis live is that it gives them an opportunity to frame the debate on their own terms. that in and of itself is dangerous. just like with any information, the best way would be to record them speaking, and properly contextualize it on either side.

for example, a sandwich format: give some relevant, factual information before the viewer hears a single word out of the nazi's mouth. follow that with short clip of the nazi that contains whatever lie they're telling, then finish by contextualizing that and explaining why they're wrong.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

averagejoel posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

averagejoel posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

Donald Trump's challengers were Hillary Clinton and the literal GOP. Yeah, great effort.

you conveniently forgot to mention "every news outlet in the US"

Every news outlet in the US didn't debate him.

never said they did. but pretty much all of them challenged him

You want to go back and read the start of the conversation instead of twisting it slightly enough to make it seem like your argument was always right? We're talking about debating and we always have.

regardless of the distinction between "debate" and "challenge", the result is that the Nazi was given a platform.
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

averagejoel posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

Donald Trump's challengers were Hillary Clinton and the literal GOP. Yeah, great effort.

you conveniently forgot to mention "every news outlet in the US"

Every news outlet in the US didn't debate him.

never said they did. but pretty much all of them challenged him
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

Donald Trump's challengers were Hillary Clinton and the literal GOP. Yeah, great effort.

you conveniently forgot to mention "every news outlet in the US"
---

peanut butter and dick

thanks-gohan posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

thanks-gohan posted...

Malfunction posted...

Let's debate nazis

Nazi: We should kill jews
Debater: That's against the law and human morality

Debate over. I don't understand why people are afraid to have it.

Debating a Nazi gives their platform legitimacy. The only winning move is to not debate a Nazi.

False. Unchallenged Nazis grow in number and gain more influence.

to debunk this idea, I present you with two examples.

1. Milo Yiannopoulos. he was de-platformed and fell off the map

2. Donald Trump. he was debunked and challenged constantly, and is now president of the US
---

peanut butter and dick

B

metro always
---

peanut butter and dick

basically:
balsa (a type of tree)
phalsa (a type of shrub)

there are also some near rhymes like awesome and pasta
---

peanut butter and dick

Malfunction posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

Hey, when the cost of living doesnt stay in line with wages, what did people expect? Creating an entire generation of uber drivers, air bnb hosts (landlords out west are literally offering people lodging to run their air bnbs for them) and Amazon factory slaves, then scoffing at their lack of income ("if they just never did anything recreational and lived off the bare essentials, they wouldnt be so broke!")...its all one big joke

Life is a pyramid scheme

functionally, capitalism is indeed a global pyramid scheme
---

peanut butter and dick

nemu posted...

It sucks, but much of it is self-made stupidity. The number of people I've seen asking for advances because they apparently don't have enough money for gas while holding their $5 coffee and $8 pack of cigarettes is mind boggling.

"stop buying avocado toast if you want to own a home!!!"
---

peanut butter and dick

FrisbeeDude posted...

Youngster_Joey_ posted...

averagejoel posted...

if there are fewer people in rural areas, they should have less political influence than cities.

What a shitty hot take lmfao

why do we give deference to rural America versus any other minority group at the ballot box? As an African American, should my vote count more because they're significantly less black people than white?

I'm not even saying that the people in rural areas should have less influence -- I'm saying that less populous areas, because theyre less populous, should have less influence.
---

peanut butter and dick

Squall28 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Squall28 posted...

It's a drastic take, but you have to admit EC does protect the voice of rural America though. There's considerably less people experiencing their life, and they'd lose every vote if it's just up to the popular vote.

if there are fewer people in rural areas, they should have less political influence than cities.

Minorities should still have a voice though. Leaving everything up to the majority is how minority groups end up getting oppressed.

if only there was some way for them to elect a representative to sit on some sort of country-wide council
---

peanut butter and dick

meralonne posted...

People frequently vote against their own best interests.

especially if there's decades of propaganda telling them to do so and major voter suppression preventing peoples' voices from being heard
---

peanut butter and dick

tequila. I've never had a significant amount of the stuff without getting fucked up
---

peanut butter and dick

Squall28 posted...

It's a drastic take, but you have to admit EC does protect the voice of rural America though. There's considerably less people experiencing their life, and they'd lose every vote if it's just up to the popular vote.

if there are fewer people in rural areas, they should have less political influence than cities.
---

peanut butter and dick

Austin_Era_II posted...

They spend more than they make.

hard not to do that when you're in debt up to your eyeballs and still want to not hate your life
---

peanut butter and dick

that's a galaxy brain take
---

peanut butter and dick