Lurker > realnifty1

pogo_rabid posted...

Just because he's better than Trump doesn't mean we should ignore the fact Biden is a creepy, brain damaged fuck.

Ok, and? What's the relevance? Where is your corollary Trump topic lest we forget that?

idgi, what's the argument here?

Biden is an inappropriate toucher so I should vote for the other rapist instead? Seriously?

I'm not reading through everything here, but I will explain what I think is the easiest way to conceptualize this.
First, remember they only ever remove a door without the real prize.

So three doors, one prize, you choose one. You are now offered to trade your one door for the other two. So instead of one chance in three you now have 2 chances in three.

This is the same as them removing one door and allowing you to switch.

Emoluments

That likely has something to do with it, but more of it is that South Korea tested and tracked the shit out of it at the start. Quarantined anyone testing positives and then went and tested anyone that they had contact with.

So they had a lot of confirmed cases early by locating the asymptomatic and quarantining them.

voldothegr8 posted...

GateKeeper bro

hahaha looks like I missed that somehow. I'll have to see if I figure out how to get near there sometime.

I have not been to Cedar Point, but it looks like they are only missing a Wing/4th Dimension style ride. Unfortunately that is a big one for me. I rode X(now X2) at Six Flags Magic Mountain in the early 2000's and there is just no going back from there.

Fuji-Q Highland only has a handful of coasters, but they are all full on bangers.

Anteaterking posted...

Yeah, but isn't the question whether only being able to serve two terms is an "eligibility" thing?

Like I read the Article 2, Clause 5 as being the eligibility requirements and the other things being possible other things that get in the way.

It is an eligibility thing, the problem is the 22nd's choice of language is vague to this specific question. It explicitly calls out how many times an un-elected acting president can be elected based off how long they served. But nowhere does it say anything about being able to serve if not elected.

You can get a Japanese copy for like $20, the US costs so much because it was in the last wave of releases with really low print runs.

Honestly, it sucks on the Saturn anyway, too much slowdown when things get busy. There was a PC release that might fare better, and if you were to go illegal I would go straight to the arcade.

Anteaterking posted...

Obviously it would be heavily argued by constitutional lawyers, but in the world according to Anteaterking it would just work like it does when the Speaker of the House doesn't fit some of the qualifications for President, which is that they get skipped in succession order.

!2th Amendment explicitly rules that out, Vice President must meet criteria to be eligible to be the president. The weirdness comes in that the 22nd Amendment only holds (by language, not necessarily intent) that they cannot be elected to the office, not that they cannot be President.

Would have to be decided by the Supreme court, and what a mess that would be.
By intention of the 22nd amendment the SC should rule they can't, and with the sitting Justices and the matter of Obama they almost certainly would rule that way, probably unanimously.

4 years from now for Herr Trump though.....

Really I don't think you will ever see it play out because of the danger involved. The SC is generally unwilling to rule on maybe's which means you'd have to win first to find out and then potentially negate the entire election if it was found unconstitutional.

Could you imagine that happening this year? Biden/Obama ticket wins in broad fashion, early December SC rules Obama cannot be VP, Trump has reasonable grounds for declaring the election invalid, country spirals into chaos and Civil War.

I never call my job Engineering, but if other people do I won't correct them. I almost always just introduce myself as a developer, even though I am a director now and I probably do more design and engineering of systems then development these days.

Probably should be charged with terrorism.

s0nicfan posted...

I'm less concerned with the overall picture because as the paper highlights the youngest group is basically unaffected so that's skewing the average. Its the groups over 40 that get crushed.

Yes, they get hit harder, but that doesn't line up with your statements. The groups over 40 make up less of the whole so even with a significantly higher deaths per 100,000 they aren't going to cause an increase of tens of thousands. That isn't how the math works, they aren't averaging the rates together, the second graph is just a subdivision of the whole with where they would map for each group size.

s0nicfan posted...

The overall suicide rate and the suicide rates of the groups aged 2534 years, 3544 years, 4554 years, 5564 years, and 6574 years were positively, significantly correlated with the national unemployment rate

I'm just going to have to disagree with that based on the evidence they presented. As I said it is a contributing factor, but there are too many upticks and outliers outside of the expected reasons to draw that type of correlation.

The most disturbing trend of their graph is the steady uptick in death 15-24, now compromising the most at risk group by the end of their data. It also does them no favors that they don't lay the data against they supposed hypothesis, the unemployment rate is known, graph it against the suicide rate if that is your position.

s0nicfan posted...

Take a look at Figure 1 in the results discussion. The suicide rate spiked by something like 10 points per 100,000 during Peak Depression. A three point spike isn't that unreasonable because even the more recent 1980s recession saw a bigger spike than that. Obviously, it depends on the age group, but the data pretty clearly shows it would be sufficient to hit those numbers.

Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see that, the largest valley to peak jump was 18 to 22 for the Great Depression over 6 years, but as noted by the graph that was pre New Deal when there was no Social Safety net to speak of. And honestly post that we see less correlation between between the economy and suicide rate other than to say that it is a contributing factor.

Certainly there will be an uptick, but nothing here supports an increase of tens of thousands.

s0nicfan posted...

Tens of thousands absolutely will. Hundreds... not unless you count the total over a decade of recession, but it could hit 100k, absolutely.

Source:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3093269/

Edit: also an Atlantic article on this topic: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/09/the-lives-lost-to-the-great-depression/279961/

That study doesn't really support increases of 10's of thousands unless it was to span a decade as the recent recessions there only see a small bump. The bigger issue is that the most recent data I can find was 2018 with 14.2 per 100,000, meaning for the 2008(11.6) recession the rate continued to climb well past the recovery point. I'm guessing some amount of opioid deaths were involved in driving this up. But a 2.4 jump over a decade is significant, but hard to attribute directly to the market as it kind of defies the previous data.

But saying we are at about 14 currently it takes a jump to about 17 to increase by 10,000 and there isn't any data to think that would happen.

You also don't really need to worry about your beard. The masks are kind of like a stand in for herd immunity since we don't have a vaccine. It won't really do much to protect you, but does a lot to cut down on how much the wearer can infect others.

If you see someone outside without a mask at this point they are basically telling you that they hope you fucking die.

EffectAndCause posted...

Im not, but with attractive cis women there isnt really the fear of them dropping below an attractiveness threshold based on cosmetic appearance, because even with no make up, pajamas and messy hair they still have the natural female features youre attracted to, where trans girls often have the burden of hiding their male features along with being an attractive woman.

So you agree then that your poll is nonsensical. I'll still answer the question you are just trolling at here.
It is transphobic if you say you aren't attracted to someone because you don't think they are a "real" woman.
It is not transphobic/mysoginistic to not be attracted to someone because they don't appeal to you.

Yeah, the problem is displaying the potential tip. Either don't show a tip or don't allow them to change it.

EffectAndCause posted...

Its assumed that heterosexual men are attracted to women.

So you are attracted to every woman on the planet?

ZeroX91 posted...

Do you know the origin of london bridge is falling down? All that matter is the current context and the current context is do what the customer says for repeat patronage.

Ok, maybe, but that is not what that phrase means. People using it wrong doesn't change that.

What?!?! The party of 'Fuck you, I got mine' isn't concerned with how many people die as long they keeping making money hand over fist? Shocked, I am truly and greatly shocked.

Your options don't line up to the question.

What does viewing someone as a woman have to do with being attracted to them?

Orlando_Jordan posted...

South Korea population: 51.47 million (2017)
United States population: 327.2 million (2018)

Hope this helps.

Sure didn't help your case. Apply a little math and reasoning before you try and come back on people.

Verdekal posted...

You should really delete all that, it is a bad look.

Welcome to Capitalism, get rich or die tryin, literally.

Same way they deal with everything he says; cognitive dissonance.

He wasn't racist for banning flight from China, he did it because he is a petulant man-child who has a need to "get back" at anyone that has done him some perceived harm.

If he had the countries interest at heart he would have banned all international travel, as it had already clearly spread. But much like the EU ban it was just the veneer of the virus as a false pretense for him to enact vengeance.

You should never attribute strategy or intelligence to Trump where you can easily see that it is instead his vanity.

darkprince45 posted...

im literally just telling you what the investigation said. That they didnt see it actually happen. This happens for most criminal cases. If they cant prove without a reasonable doubt, hes not getting in trouble

Which is why pigs oinked, It is plain as day, the investigation covered it up, just like every single pig down the line. oink oink oink

darkprince45 posted...

If you really want to play devils advocate. Theres a couple articles that detail the investigation and you never actually see him plant it. Just a body camera goes for 4 minutes. So thats probably why hes not fired. Thats on part for most cases

This is why all cops are pigs., You literally see him search the area, no drugs, he returns to the area with it palmed in his hand, he tries to place it on the surface but like only a person that knows the are above consequence he fucks up placing and knocks it into the cup holder while doing so. This is all plain as day on the body cam.

If good cops willingly roll in the fucking mud with them, then they are pigs.

viewmaster_pi posted...

i can't defend trump, but it sure is fucking stupid when there's an article about some shithead corrupt cop, and the immediate reaction is "fuck pigs, there shouldn't be any cops"

Would be a fine take if it wasn't for the fact these guys are still cops, so yes fuck those pigs. Until they actually do something to stop this shit, then they are all complicit.

Cool false topic title bro.No wonder everyone thinks everything is fake news when they can't even distinguish easily provable facts from sensationalism.

Can we just say that everyone is wrong here in some way?

MSN should be less clickbaity with the headlines, but there does appear to be some 'there' there, in that the dosage is relatively close to the LD50 and that is concerning. Not sure how many other commonly prescribed things exist in that range.

Trump Jr is wrong with his numbers about caffeine and just over corrects too far the other way.

24 hour news cycles and clickbait wins again.

I gotta feel like that venn diagram is just a circle.

Whataboutism at its finest. Everyone else sucks, so it's ok that Trump is terrible.

Good to see even the Trumpers have given up on him though.

Kazi1212 posted...

Clearly that reporter was trying to fear monger so Trump had to shoot him down. Americans aren't scared, we have been through much worse as a nation, now is the time to be strong.

AHAHAHAHAHHA

*wheeze wheeze*

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

So I'm not going to dig into state law and state constitution, but this is quite possibly the only way to be able to enforce a curfew. I mean you do realize a curfew is in direct violation of freedom of association and freedom of movement. And the search and seizure is just to make it easier to take those 1500 rolls of TP from that reseller.

Yes, these can be abused and people should be 100 percent vigilant of what is being done in the name of safety and how long they try to have it remain in place once the danger has passed.

But situations like this are the definition of what martial law and suspension of civil liberties are for.

DepreceV2 posted...

Building massive wall at the borders is an idiotic waste of money IMO. However, the premise of greatly increasing our ability to control who enters and exits our country was a wise idea. We absolutely need to tighten up how easy it is for people to cross our border. This Pandemic is a good enough reason why on its own.

That's not how pandemics spread. Retired people traveling and business travel is how it spreads.

I was indifferent about Trump wanting to bring all of our manufacturers back to the US because I thought it didnt matter much. If anything, the price of our stuff would go up so I wasnt too thrilled about that. However, hearing the story about how all the masks we manufactured in China couldnt be shipped to us because China said so really opened my eyes here. There is no way we should give another Country that kind of control. Imagine the Chaos if China decides to shut down all shipments from China to the US because they can. That would be worse than this damn virus.

This isn't really anything he has control over outside of creating insane import taxes that offset that American labor is more expensive. Jobs aren't coming back unless the state subsidizes them heavily or we automate them to the point that is does no one any good anyway. Even then access to raw materials are much better elsewhere.

The policy of not giving illegal immigrants healthcare makes sense now too. It made some sense to begin with but it is a much bigger issue than I thought after this virus hit us. We dont have the resources to care for our country. We dont have enough Hospitals let alone Hospital beds. Giving out free healthcare non Americans takes up valuable resources. We need more resources in general before we can even consider giving out free healthcare to non Americans.

Bad take, health care for everyone would mean an overall healthier population that would be more resistant to pandemics as well as a more robust healthcare system since more people are already being seen more regularly making us less likely to be overwhelmed by a crush of unhealthy people who never go to the doctor in the first place.

That's not how mortality rate works.

deaths/(deaths+recovered)

You can't count diagnosed because we have no idea what will happen to them yet.

DuranOfForcena posted...

asking "where" it originated to me denotes geographic location

maybe asking "how" it originated might have elicited the kind of responses you think OP was meaning to elicit

The problem there is that Wuhan is not "where" it originated, at least not by anything we know of.
It is the place of the first documented widespread outbreak, but that doesn't explicitly have anything to do with origination.

About 100 yeas too late, but it also doesn't exactly do what you might think if I'm reading it right.

So lynching as we most understand it already falls under the statute being amended here as it would qualify as a Hate Crime. The added section labeled as lynching defines itself as conspiracy to violate Civil Rights, commit a hate crime, or infringe on religious beliefs.

Ultimately I end with mixed feelings on this as conspiracy to violate Civil Rights could see an awfully broad application.

Bio1590 posted...

Aaron Zelinsky and Jonathan Kravis just said "fuck it" and quit.

Holy shit.

That part is the only thing resembling normal here. Judges get really pissy if you come back and change something like that after the fact they go hard with questioning why. With new prosecutors they get to just deflect on not knowing why the old prosecutor did what they did but that they can assure the judge this is the correct recommendation they are putting forth.

Bad idea unless you are pretty much completely without a family of you own. If you have a spouse, on most of the west coast they will be responsible for the debt due to community property regulations.

Also if you try to give away/sell everything before you die so your estate has nothing then it is likely they will sue your estate for fraud and all of that would be taken back and used to cover your debt.

So pensions are not inherently bad, but because it meant making a commitment and forward thinking it has largely been done away with where possible. Social Security is a type of pension and it shows a lot of the issues that can happen if the guarantor proves to not be so diligent in their duties.

401k's vs stocks is a little trickier, but anyone not self employed should almost always contribute enough for the free match. 401k does have some advantages though, it will generally come out ahead in catastrophic events. Under 59 1/2 you take a 10% penalty, but you can git a hardship withdrawal that will waive that in various cases like medical emergency. A sell of stocks before you retire is likely incur the maximum capitol gains tax rate you would see in your lifetime. Because 401k's a managed they are more resilient to a market crash, where as an individual investor could potentially get wiped out and not everyone has time and knowledge to invest properly diversified.

Once you are retired you should be paying little to no tax on either as your taxable income should be much lower. But you were taxed(often at your highest lifetime rates) for what you earned and invested in stocks as opposed to nothing on those 401k contributions. (if you are doing really well, you want to max your 401k as that $19500 was likely going to be taxed at 32%-35%)

All that said, there is a lot of math and research to maybe have one turn out a little better for you, but most of the time it is still going to be the 401k so save yourself the work and just up your contribution and be less stressed when you get older.