Basicness
Basicness

Basicness

Undere
Undere

Undere

Basically
Basically

Basically

The Worlds First
The Worlds First

The Worlds First

Youths
Youths

Youths

Food Service
Food Service

Food Service

shoveller
 shoveller

shoveller

no idea
 no idea

no idea

sticked
 sticked

sticked

fact
fact

fact

🔥 | Latest

Amazon, Bad, and Be Like: krista (030) y@cherryblushed i used to read 3-4 full sized novels in middle school. now i see anything longer than a paragraph and bounce. i'll miss u brain cells, can't believe u peaked at age 12 15/9/18, 1:04 pm 68 Retweets 238 Likes takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights: dewdrop156: memecage: It do be like that. I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister recently and I was talking about how one of the reasons I don’t read as much as I used to is because I don’t have the same resources I did when I was a 4th grader. When I was a kid, I could sit and read all I wanted, all I had to to was exist and go where people took me. I didn’t have to feed myself or pay bills or keep track of things, which of course now I have to deal with all of those things so I can’t read as much and tend to read pretty easy to read books. My sister brought up the really good point that, of course I want to read easy books, I’m a young adult, in a very tumultuous phase of life, constantly being thrown new information, my brain doesnt want a classical novel, my brain wants something readable and immersive. tl;dr don’t feel bad for not reading as much as you used to, it’s okay. Read what you can when you can and don’t stress about the rest But nowadays, there are so many more resources for reading that you can gain access to. Even though you’re busy and stressed out my life, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t continue to strive to read whenever possible. I’ve compiled this basic list of super accessible ways to read in the modern age.1. LibbyLibby is a library app, and it free to use. If you have a library card (which you can either pick up at a branch or online, depending on where you live), you put in your information, and you have access to your library’s ebooks and audiobooks. Generally, you can check ebooks out for two to three weeks, and it gives you the option to renew (if someone isn’t waiting in line for that book) or return early. It’s super user- friendly. If you want to scam the system a little bit, a lot of libraries give you 30 to 60 days after making a card online to come in and actually get a physical card and show your ID. If you are looking for a specific book that your library may not have, make library cards at other locations with fake addresses and check out their supply. I personally have about eight library cards, so I always can find what I’m looking for unless it’s super rare. 2. KindleWhile you can buy the actual Amazon e-reader, you can also just use the free app. There are a bunch of ebooks you can read for free, or for a low price. If you have Kindle Unlimited ($10/month), you can borrow up to ten KU books at a time for as long as you want. A lot of authors have KU books, so it’s a good way to go. 3. NookBarnes and Noble’s Nook is similar to the Kindle—comes in a physical e-reader, but is also usable as a free app. I will say I find that their selection generally costs more than Amazon’s selection, but it’s an option if you prefer to stay away from Amazon products. One thing they do sometime around the end of the year is send you out a refund check for all the books that you purchased through them that were at a higher market price then they would’ve been elsewhere. I’ve gotten like three of these, so I figure it’s a regular thing. 4. AudibleFor people who are sight-impaired or have difficulty sitting down and reading a book, audiobooks are SO the way to go. When you sign up, you can receive up to two free audiobooks, and whatever plan you decide to go with gives you two free audiobooks a month (from a specific selection) in addition to your credits! If you have Kindle ebooks, there is sometimes an option to purchase the accompanying Audible audiobook for a super discounted rate. If you don’t like an audiobook, you can call in to return it at any time. I have something like forty or fifty audiobooks from them, and I’ve exchanged another twenty. These options are all in addition to physical books from your local library, and discount bookstores. The nice thing about ebooks is that generally they have the option to highlight and bookmark pages, change the font size and type, and even change the color of the page if you prefer.I always thought audiobooks were for old people until a few years ago when I was commuting about three hours a day for work. I wasn’t reading nearly as much, and as an avid reader, that distressed me greatly.Finally, I looked into audiobooks and it was a huge life changer. Instead of wasting three hours a day in traffic, I was reading for three hours a day that I would’ve otherwise not been able to. Not only does it make a trip go faster, but it makes it much more enjoyable.And even if you don’t want it for the commute or for the gym, audiobooks are a really good option for people who have vision problems. I have migraines when I stare at screens too much, so I pop on an audiobook and just crochet or do the dishes. I have a friend who has very bad eyesight, and he has not been able to read in something close to a year. I set him up with a library card and a Libby account, and all of a sudden, he was able to catch up on all the books he had been wanting to read!I’m just saying, I promote reading because no matter what you read, you’re learning something. Even though life is stressful and crazy and distracting, there are still ways you can find to sit down and curl up with a good book. “My brother has his sword, I have my books. And a mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone.” -Tyrion Lannister
Amazon, Bad, and Be Like: krista (030)
 y@cherryblushed
 i used to read 3-4 full sized
 novels in middle school. now i see
 anything longer than a paragraph
 and bounce. i'll miss u brain cells,
 can't believe u peaked at age 12
 15/9/18, 1:04 pm
 68 Retweets 238 Likes
takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights:

dewdrop156:
memecage:
It do be like that.

I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister recently and I was talking about how one of the reasons I don’t read as much as I used to is because I don’t have the same resources I did when I was a 4th grader. When I was a kid, I could sit and read all I wanted, all I had to to was exist and go where people took me. I didn’t have to feed myself or pay bills or keep track of things, which of course now I have to deal with all of those things so I can’t read as much and tend to read pretty easy to read books. My sister brought up the really good point that, of course I want to read easy books, I’m a young adult, in a very tumultuous phase of life, constantly being thrown new information, my brain doesnt want a classical novel, my brain wants something readable and immersive. 
tl;dr don’t feel bad for not reading as much as you used to, it’s okay. Read what you can when you can and don’t stress about the rest


But nowadays, there are so many more resources for reading that you can gain access to. Even though you’re busy and stressed out my life, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t continue to strive to read whenever possible. I’ve compiled this basic list of super accessible ways to read in the modern age.1. LibbyLibby is a library app, and it free to use. If you have a library card (which you can either pick up at a branch or online, depending on where you live), you put in your information, and you have access to your library’s ebooks and audiobooks. Generally, you can check ebooks out for two to three weeks, and it gives you the option to renew (if someone isn’t waiting in line for that book) or return early. It’s super user- friendly. If you want to scam the system a little bit, a lot of libraries give you 30 to 60 days after making a card online to come in and actually get a physical card and show your ID. If you are looking for a specific book that your library may not have, make library cards at other locations with fake addresses and check out their supply. I personally have about eight library cards, so I always can find what I’m looking for unless it’s super rare. 2. KindleWhile you can buy the actual Amazon e-reader, you can also just use the free app. There are a bunch of ebooks you can read for free, or for a low price. If you have Kindle Unlimited ($10/month), you can borrow up to ten KU books at a time for as long as you want. A lot of authors have KU books, so it’s a good way to go. 3. NookBarnes and Noble’s Nook is similar to the Kindle—comes in a physical e-reader, but is also usable as a free app. I will say I find that their selection generally costs more than Amazon’s selection, but it’s an option if you prefer to stay away from Amazon products. One thing they do sometime around the end of the year is send you out a refund check for all the books that you purchased through them that were at a higher market price then they would’ve been elsewhere. I’ve gotten like three of these, so I figure it’s a regular thing. 4. AudibleFor people who are sight-impaired or have difficulty sitting down and reading a book, audiobooks are SO the way to go. When you sign up, you can receive up to two free audiobooks, and whatever plan you decide to go with gives you two free audiobooks a month (from a specific selection) in addition to your credits! If you have Kindle ebooks, there is sometimes an option to purchase the accompanying Audible audiobook for a super discounted rate. If you don’t like an audiobook, you can call in to return it at any time. I have something like forty or fifty audiobooks from them, and I’ve exchanged another twenty. These options are all in addition to physical books from your local library, and discount bookstores. The nice thing about ebooks is that generally they have the option to highlight and bookmark pages, change the font size and type, and even change the color of the page if you prefer.I always thought audiobooks were for old people until a few years ago when I was commuting about three hours a day for work. I wasn’t reading nearly as much, and as an avid reader, that distressed me greatly.Finally, I looked into audiobooks and it was a huge life changer. Instead of wasting three hours a day in traffic, I was reading for three hours a day that I would’ve otherwise not been able to. Not only does it make a trip go faster, but it makes it much more enjoyable.And even if you don’t want it for the commute or for the gym, audiobooks are a really good option for people who have vision problems. I have migraines when I stare at screens too much, so I pop on an audiobook and just crochet or do the dishes. I have a friend who has very bad eyesight, and he has not been able to read in something close to a year. I set him up with a library card and a Libby account, and all of a sudden, he was able to catch up on all the books he had been wanting to read!I’m just saying, I promote reading because no matter what you read, you’re learning something. Even though life is stressful and crazy and distracting, there are still ways you can find to sit down and curl up with a good book.

“My brother has his sword, I have my books. And a mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone.” -Tyrion Lannister

takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights: dewdrop156: memecage: It do be like that. I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister r...

Brains, Fucking, and Guns: change.org Trending petition Matt There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we think you might be interested in signing it. meatswitch: snakegay: indianworiorprincess: snakegay: jorycancrochet: gorps: blipblerp: hungwy: lgbltsandwitch: ssj14goku: dildomuncher3000: ssj14goku: domozillla: ssj14goku: thetwinkerbell: ssj14goku: Change.org - Petition To Hire 1,000,000 People To Put Their Fingers In The Shoot Hole Of Peoples’ Guns So They Can’t Shoot Them It’s still gonna shoot… And they’re gonna lose a finger No. The finger blocks the bullet. We can do this This is a gun we’re talking about. The projectile is fired using an explosion, not by compressed air of a toy gun or the elastic forces of a sling shot. People would be lucky if they only lost their finger. The finger blocks it The finger won’t block it - the shaft is only there for keeping the bullet straight, all the propulsion happens behind the bullet. The bullet would rip through the finger, not that many would actually fit without the victim being a child, and beyond. The bullet would go forward a little and then hit the finger and stop it’s not that hard to understand People are going to lose their hands. Go watch Mythbusters. They did an episode on this, the hand fucking exploded. No, the bullet would start to go but stop at the finger. Thats basic physics. Also hands dont explode normally they did something wrong. Why the dingleknockers would you even consider sticking your finger in the barrel of a loaded gun?? the amount of force propelling the bullet at that close of range would shatter the finger at the very least; this is a petition for 1,000,000 people to loose the use of their hands. If a bullet explodes the back of a persons skull when they shoot it in their mouth it sure as hell will explode a finger. No the finger would stop it I’m loving the idiocy of this post. Ppl with brains: ummm finger go boom… Others: no bullet stop. U no kno fisics :V no the finger would stop it You guy who think the bullet would stop at the finger have never shot a gun and can volunteer to it their fingers in the barrel of my 9 mil and I’ll I’ll the trigger and see if it will stop the bullet. Dumdasses the finger would stop it
Brains, Fucking, and Guns: change.org Trending petition
 Matt There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we
 think you might be interested in signing it.
meatswitch:
snakegay:


indianworiorprincess:

snakegay:


jorycancrochet:

gorps:

blipblerp:


hungwy:

lgbltsandwitch:


ssj14goku:

dildomuncher3000:

ssj14goku:

domozillla:

ssj14goku:

thetwinkerbell:

ssj14goku:

Change.org - Petition To Hire 1,000,000 People To Put Their Fingers In The Shoot Hole Of Peoples’ Guns So They Can’t Shoot Them

It’s still gonna shoot… And they’re gonna lose a finger

No. The finger blocks the bullet. We can do this

This is a gun we’re talking about. The projectile is fired using an explosion, not by compressed air of a toy gun or the elastic forces of a sling shot. People would be lucky if they only lost their finger.

The finger blocks it

The finger won’t block it - the shaft is only there for keeping the bullet straight, all the propulsion happens behind the bullet. The bullet would rip through the finger, not that many would actually fit without the victim being a child, and beyond.

The bullet would go forward a little and then hit the finger and stop it’s not that hard to understand


People are going to lose their hands. Go watch Mythbusters. They did an episode on this, the hand fucking exploded.



No, the bullet would start to go but stop at the finger. Thats basic physics. Also hands dont explode normally they did something wrong.


Why the dingleknockers would you even consider sticking your finger in the barrel of a loaded gun?? the amount of force propelling the bullet at that close of range would shatter the finger at the very least; this is a petition for 1,000,000 people to loose the use of their hands. If a bullet explodes the back of a persons skull when they shoot it in their mouth it sure as hell will explode a finger.


No the finger would stop it


I’m loving the idiocy of this post.
Ppl with brains: ummm finger go boom…
Others: no bullet stop. U no kno fisics :V

no the finger would stop it


You guy who think the bullet would stop at the finger have never shot a gun and can volunteer  to it their fingers in the barrel of my 9 mil and I’ll I’ll the trigger and see if it will stop the bullet.  Dumdasses

the finger would stop it

meatswitch: snakegay: indianworiorprincess: snakegay: jorycancrochet: gorps: blipblerp: hungwy: lgbltsandwitch: ssj14goku: dild...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...

Apparently, Confused, and Friends: solarmorrigan So. 10th grade English class. We all come in one morning to find a balloon and a perfectly sharpened pencil on each of our desks. No instructions, no explanation, which is strange, because our teacher is meticulous about that sort of thing. A couple of people try to ask her and she says we'll get to it. She takes role and then announces that she needs to go to the copy room and she'll be back in a couple of minutes Kinda unorthodox, but no one is complaining because this is advanced English and the teacher usually goes kinda hard. So, y'know Brief respite. We all sit and chat; one of the boys teasingly steals a girl's balloon, but gives it back to her easily enough; it's quiet and kind of a nice break. Then the teacher comes back, stops in the doorway, and just stares at us After a long moment, she says, confused, You didn't pop the balloons." To which one of the guys about two rows over exclaims, "We're allowed to pop them?" and immediately turns around and stabs his friend's balloon with the pencil There is a vicious revenge balloon-stabbing, and a few more people pop seatmates' balloons or their own, and the whole time the teacher is just shaking her head. "I can't believe you didn't pop your balloons." Apparently we were starting Lord of the Flies that day and she wanted to demonstrate the basic concept of kids turning on each other when there are no authority figures present and it was basically my favorite failed social experiment ever
Apparently, Confused, and Friends: solarmorrigan
 So. 10th grade English class. We all come in one
 morning to find a balloon and a perfectly
 sharpened pencil on each of our desks. No
 instructions, no explanation, which is strange,
 because our teacher is meticulous about that
 sort of thing. A couple of people try to ask her
 and she says we'll get to it. She takes role and
 then announces that she needs to go to the
 copy room and she'll be back in a couple of
 minutes
 Kinda unorthodox, but no one is complaining
 because this is advanced English and the
 teacher usually goes kinda hard. So, y'know
 Brief respite. We all sit and chat; one of the
 boys teasingly steals a girl's balloon, but gives it
 back to her easily enough; it's quiet and kind of
 a nice break. Then the teacher comes back,
 stops in the doorway, and just stares at us
 After a long moment, she says, confused, You
 didn't pop the balloons."
 To which one of the guys about two rows over
 exclaims, "We're allowed to pop them?" and
 immediately turns around and stabs his friend's
 balloon with the pencil
 There is a vicious revenge balloon-stabbing,
 and a few more people pop seatmates' balloons
 or their own, and the whole time the teacher is
 just shaking her head. "I can't believe you didn't
 pop your balloons."
 Apparently we were starting Lord of the
 Flies that day and she wanted to demonstrate
 the basic concept of kids turning on each other
 when there are no authority figures present and
 it was basically my favorite failed social
 experiment ever

Animals, Bad, and Choose One: Interesting Fact: Alex the parrot's (A subject of a 37-year experiment) last words to his caretaker were "You be good. I love you. interesting-fact.tumblr.com arry-truman casatoo: sugar-spider: a-whole-clan-of-johnnys: interesting-fact: Source CRY A LOT TRY NOT TO CRY LIE DOWN holy shit dude If you don't know Alex, I suggest you read up on him. Because yeah, sure, any parrot can mimic, but Alex was one of the first to prove on many occasions that he understood the meaning behind the words he said With that in mind, just think about what he said for a sec. Alex had to understand on some level that death means leaving. That's fucking mindblowing. Alex also was shown to have the intelligence of a young child, anywhere from 3 to 5 years old. He could do basic addition and subtraction, and independently taught himself the concept of zero (something that most CIVILIZATIONS couldn't do!) He had a vocabulary of thousands of words, some of which he made up himself, and had deep interpersonal bonds with many scientists and trainers, as well as other parrots. Alex the parrot is basically the coolest bird ever animals are often smarter than you think. There is/was a gorilla they taught sign language to. And one day she asked for a kitten. they gave her a stuffed animal but she signed sad. She wanted a real one. She was allowed to choose one from a litter. She named it All Ball and she loved it Except one day All Ball escaped from the cage and was hit by a car. And this shows you just how much animals can understand. They signed what had happened but didn't think the gorilla would understand. But she started making weeping, howling/crying sounds and the signs for bad, sad, etc. And then "Sleep, cat". She understood death. She's had two kittens since then Animals understand more than you think. Depends on the animal, yes. Animals are incredible
Animals, Bad, and Choose One: Interesting Fact:
 Alex the parrot's (A subject of a 37-year
 experiment) last words to his caretaker were
 "You be good. I love you.
 interesting-fact.tumblr.com
 arry-truman
 casatoo:
 sugar-spider:
 a-whole-clan-of-johnnys:
 interesting-fact:
 Source
 CRY
 A LOT
 TRY
 NOT TO CRY
 LIE
 DOWN
 holy shit dude
 If you don't know Alex, I suggest you read up on him. Because yeah,
 sure, any parrot can mimic, but Alex was one of the first to prove on
 many occasions that he understood the meaning behind the words he
 said
 With that in mind, just think about what he said for a sec. Alex had to
 understand on some level that death means leaving. That's fucking
 mindblowing.
 Alex also was shown to have the intelligence of a young child, anywhere from 3
 to 5 years old. He could do basic addition and subtraction, and independently
 taught himself the concept of zero (something that most CIVILIZATIONS
 couldn't do!) He had a vocabulary of thousands of words, some of which he
 made up himself, and had deep interpersonal bonds with many scientists and
 trainers, as well as other parrots.
 Alex the parrot is basically the coolest bird ever
 animals are often smarter than you think. There is/was a gorilla they taught sign
 language to. And one day she asked for a kitten. they gave her a stuffed animal but she
 signed sad. She wanted a real one. She was allowed to choose one from a litter.
 She named it All Ball and she loved it
 Except one day All Ball escaped from the cage and was hit by a car. And this shows you
 just how much animals can understand. They signed what had happened but didn't
 think the gorilla would understand. But she started making weeping, howling/crying
 sounds and the signs for bad, sad, etc.
 And then "Sleep, cat". She understood death.
 She's had two kittens since then
 Animals understand more than you think. Depends on the animal, yes.
Animals are incredible

Animals are incredible

Brains, Fucking, and Guns: change.org Trending petition Matt There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we think you might be interested in signing it. meatswitch: snakegay: indianworiorprincess: snakegay: jorycancrochet: gorps: blipblerp: hungwy: lgbltsandwitch: ssj14goku: dildomuncher3000: ssj14goku: domozillla: ssj14goku: thetwinkerbell: ssj14goku: Change.org - Petition To Hire 1,000,000 People To Put Their Fingers In The Shoot Hole Of Peoples’ Guns So They Can’t Shoot Them It’s still gonna shoot… And they’re gonna lose a finger No. The finger blocks the bullet. We can do this This is a gun we’re talking about. The projectile is fired using an explosion, not by compressed air of a toy gun or the elastic forces of a sling shot. People would be lucky if they only lost their finger. The finger blocks it The finger won’t block it - the shaft is only there for keeping the bullet straight, all the propulsion happens behind the bullet. The bullet would rip through the finger, not that many would actually fit without the victim being a child, and beyond. The bullet would go forward a little and then hit the finger and stop it’s not that hard to understand People are going to lose their hands. Go watch Mythbusters. They did an episode on this, the hand fucking exploded. No, the bullet would start to go but stop at the finger. Thats basic physics. Also hands dont explode normally they did something wrong. Why the dingleknockers would you even consider sticking your finger in the barrel of a loaded gun?? the amount of force propelling the bullet at that close of range would shatter the finger at the very least; this is a petition for 1,000,000 people to loose the use of their hands. If a bullet explodes the back of a persons skull when they shoot it in their mouth it sure as hell will explode a finger. No the finger would stop it I’m loving the idiocy of this post. Ppl with brains: ummm finger go boom… Others: no bullet stop. U no kno fisics :V no the finger would stop it You guy who think the bullet would stop at the finger have never shot a gun and can volunteer to it their fingers in the barrel of my 9 mil and I’ll I’ll the trigger and see if it will stop the bullet. Dumdasses the finger would stop it
Brains, Fucking, and Guns: change.org Trending petition
 Matt There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we
 think you might be interested in signing it.
meatswitch:
snakegay:


indianworiorprincess:

snakegay:


jorycancrochet:

gorps:

blipblerp:


hungwy:

lgbltsandwitch:


ssj14goku:

dildomuncher3000:

ssj14goku:

domozillla:

ssj14goku:

thetwinkerbell:

ssj14goku:

Change.org - Petition To Hire 1,000,000 People To Put Their Fingers In The Shoot Hole Of Peoples’ Guns So They Can’t Shoot Them

It’s still gonna shoot… And they’re gonna lose a finger

No. The finger blocks the bullet. We can do this

This is a gun we’re talking about. The projectile is fired using an explosion, not by compressed air of a toy gun or the elastic forces of a sling shot. People would be lucky if they only lost their finger.

The finger blocks it

The finger won’t block it - the shaft is only there for keeping the bullet straight, all the propulsion happens behind the bullet. The bullet would rip through the finger, not that many would actually fit without the victim being a child, and beyond.

The bullet would go forward a little and then hit the finger and stop it’s not that hard to understand


People are going to lose their hands. Go watch Mythbusters. They did an episode on this, the hand fucking exploded.



No, the bullet would start to go but stop at the finger. Thats basic physics. Also hands dont explode normally they did something wrong.


Why the dingleknockers would you even consider sticking your finger in the barrel of a loaded gun?? the amount of force propelling the bullet at that close of range would shatter the finger at the very least; this is a petition for 1,000,000 people to loose the use of their hands. If a bullet explodes the back of a persons skull when they shoot it in their mouth it sure as hell will explode a finger.


No the finger would stop it


I’m loving the idiocy of this post.
Ppl with brains: ummm finger go boom…
Others: no bullet stop. U no kno fisics :V

no the finger would stop it


You guy who think the bullet would stop at the finger have never shot a gun and can volunteer  to it their fingers in the barrel of my 9 mil and I’ll I’ll the trigger and see if it will stop the bullet.  Dumdasses

the finger would stop it

meatswitch: snakegay: indianworiorprincess: snakegay: jorycancrochet: gorps: blipblerp: hungwy: lgbltsandwitch: ssj14goku: dild...

Ass, Fail, and Fucking: Jessica Liebman ajessicaliebman Follow Hey, I wrote something! I've been hiring people for 10 years, and I still swear bya simple rule: If someone doesn't send a thank you email, don't hire them. I've been hiring people for 10 years, and I still swear by a simple rule: if s An executive managing editor who has hired hundreds of people believes candidates who send thank you emails show they want the job. businessinsider.com Muging M. Zhang @muqingmzhang Follow White people's fixation on inconsequential social norms is a way to structurally keep out non-white people who lack the cultural capital and privilege to know every one of these inane social rules we're supposed to perform to be granted the jobs and resources we fucking deserve. Jessica Liebman @jessicaliebman Hey, I wrote something!. I've been hiring people for 10 years, and I still swear by a simple rule: If someone doesn't send a thank you email, don't hire them. businessinsider.com/how-to-write-t.. Muqing M. Zhang @muqingmzhang Follow As people who lack white or class privilege know, not possessing this cultural capital causes intense anxiety and alienation. Networking events, office small talk, interviews are often dreadful experiences bc we're being judged according to rules that were set up for us to fail. Muqing M. Zhang @muqingmzhang Follow Everyone who has experienced the dread & anxiety of being in a room full of privileged white people and literally not knowing what they're talking about and second guessing everything you do, knows that these "proper politeness" rules are just a way to alienate & marginalize us. Muqing M. Zhang Follow muingmzhang These social norms of the dominant group create intense emotional strain for marginalized peoples. They cause immense mental labor for us to learn and mimic these behaviors, fear that resources will be withheld, and anxiety when we can't contort ourselves to fit their demands. thesunshineshow: kushonthecoast: siryouarebeingmocked: yourpoliticsarestupid: uncommonbish: THISTHISTHIS, and linguistic prescriptivism also falls into this category. Completely pointless, historically arbitrary way to keep TALENT + MERIT as secondary qualifiers. “First impressions matter” my ass. Get Gen Xs out of hiring positions Someone didn’t send a thank you email. I always love it when some idiot takes a single person’s actions and uses them to generalize about “white people” or “men” or whoever. white people’s fixations on inconsequential social norms Who wants to tell this guy about, say, Japanese tea ceremonies? In fact, this statement is not only racist against white people, it’s racist against non-whites too. the jobs we [CENSORED] deserve Isn’t that for the hiring manager to determine, not you? If you’re throwing this pseudoinellectual, racist, self-entitled tantrum over a single hiring manager requiring a minor courtesy, why would anyone want to hire you? Do you think most white applicants are automatically going know they should send a thank you letter? “First impressions matter” my ass. You…you do realize that concept isn’t remotely limited to Gen Xers, right? How fucking low does the bar have to be that asking for a thank you is too fucking much? Pathetic doesn’t even begin to cover it. I thought it was common sense to say thank you for getting hired but it turns out I’ve been a superior, high class white male all along. I learn so much on Tumblr everyday. “nonwhites are idiotic caveman with zero basic social skills” sounds kind of racist to me.
Ass, Fail, and Fucking: Jessica Liebman
 ajessicaliebman
 Follow
 Hey, I wrote something! I've been hiring
 people for 10 years, and I still swear bya
 simple rule: If someone doesn't send a thank
 you email, don't hire them.
 I've been hiring people for 10 years, and I still swear by a simple rule: if s
 An executive managing editor who has hired hundreds of people believes
 candidates who send thank you emails show they want the job.
 businessinsider.com

 Muging M. Zhang
 @muqingmzhang
 Follow
 White people's fixation on
 inconsequential social norms is a way to
 structurally keep out non-white people
 who lack the cultural capital and
 privilege to know every one of these
 inane social rules we're supposed to
 perform to be granted the jobs and
 resources we fucking deserve.
 Jessica Liebman @jessicaliebman
 Hey, I wrote something!. I've been hiring people for 10 years, and I still
 swear by a simple rule: If someone doesn't send a thank you email, don't hire
 them. businessinsider.com/how-to-write-t..

 Muqing M. Zhang
 @muqingmzhang
 Follow
 As people who lack white or class
 privilege know, not possessing this
 cultural capital causes intense anxiety
 and alienation. Networking events, office
 small talk, interviews are often dreadful
 experiences bc we're being judged
 according to rules that were set up for us
 to fail.

 Muqing M. Zhang
 @muqingmzhang
 Follow
 Everyone who has experienced the dread
 & anxiety of being in a room full of
 privileged white people and literally not
 knowing what they're talking about and
 second guessing everything you do,
 knows that these "proper politeness"
 rules are just a way to alienate &
 marginalize us.

 Muqing M. Zhang
 Follow
 muingmzhang
 These social norms of the dominant
 group create intense emotional strain for
 marginalized peoples. They cause
 immense mental labor for us to learn and
 mimic these behaviors, fear that
 resources will be withheld, and anxiety
 when we can't contort ourselves to fit
 their demands.
thesunshineshow:
kushonthecoast:


siryouarebeingmocked:


yourpoliticsarestupid:

uncommonbish:

THISTHISTHIS, and linguistic prescriptivism also falls into this category. Completely pointless, historically arbitrary way to keep TALENT + MERIT as secondary qualifiers. “First impressions matter” my ass. Get Gen Xs out of hiring positions

Someone didn’t send a thank you email. 

I always love it when some idiot takes a single person’s actions and uses them to generalize about “white people” or “men” or whoever.
white people’s fixations on inconsequential social norms
Who wants to tell this guy about, say, Japanese tea ceremonies? In fact, this statement is not only racist against white people, it’s racist against non-whites too.
the jobs we [CENSORED] deserve
Isn’t that for the hiring manager to determine, not you? If you’re throwing this pseudoinellectual, racist, self-entitled tantrum over a single hiring manager requiring a minor courtesy, why would anyone want to hire you? Do you think most white applicants are automatically going know they should send a thank you letter?


“First impressions matter” my ass.


You…you do realize that concept isn’t remotely limited to Gen Xers, right?


How fucking low does the bar have to be that asking for a thank you is too fucking much?
Pathetic doesn’t even begin to cover it.


I thought it was common sense to say thank you for getting hired but it turns out I’ve been a superior, high class white male all along. I learn so much on Tumblr everyday. 


“nonwhites are idiotic caveman with zero basic social skills” sounds kind of racist to me.

thesunshineshow: kushonthecoast: siryouarebeingmocked: yourpoliticsarestupid: uncommonbish: THISTHISTHIS, and linguistic prescriptivis...

Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.
Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
tank-grrl:
hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed bas...

America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for. With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great
America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
lazorsandparadox:
tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.


With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great

lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcan...