Play Nice Random Chat Thread IV

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Dropping like flies. Some will be killed by their own hubris. The world needs to move on from that politics.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

I think American conservatives are a somewhat different breed. Not saying they are all like that, but the "fringe" is substantial enough to perhaps not even really be a mere fringe.

You’re probably right, American politics is a completely different breed.

 

[goalieboy82]

Trigger warning.

Spoiler

View attachment 976485

[\spoiler]

i raise you:

 

[Snake_Baker]

 

[ferball]

View attachment 977051

I don't think a country that effectively put a monkey on trial for evolving (Snopes trial) less than 100 years ago has very far to slide back into superstition.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

He's taking Trump's decline hard.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

View attachment 977051

Sagan was a great man and this is very prescient. It's a pity the voices of great Americans can't be heard any more. Their political system is set up for the scum to rise to the top.

I'm still confused as to why some support the demonstrably worst of the scum, though.

 

[koshari]

Sagan was a great man and this is very prescient. It's a pity the voices of great Americans can't be heard any more. Their political system is set up for the scum to rise to the top.

I'm still confused as to why some support the demonstrably worst of the scum, though.

theres a lot of tribalism here, if person x is better than person y but happends to be in party a we wont vote for him. having sdaid that IMO the 2 current candidates are both poor.

 

[krakouers]

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Sagan was a great man and this is very prescient. It's a pity the voices of great Americans can't be heard any more. Their political system is set up for the scum to rise to the top.

I'm still confused as to why some support the demonstrably worst of the scum, though.

I think as Koshari says above, it's the partisanship. If Biden was a good candidate and Trump was Trump, you could make the clear argument that people should break partisanship. But when they're both crap, and one just happens to be more crap, people think "why should I break partisanship to vote for an awful candidate? Trump will be gone in either 0 or 4 years, so I'll hold ship".

 

[ferball]

Sagan was a great man and this is very prescient. It's a pity the voices of great Americans can't be heard any more. Their political system is set up for the scum to rise to the top.

I'm still confused as to why some support the demonstrably worst of the scum, though.

All political systems get gamed eventually.

Sagan is having a (deserved) go at the new age set, but fundamentalism has always been the biggest hotbed of superstition in the US. In fact every problem the country has is caused or made significantly worse by the manipulation of those fundamentalist religious types. A big problem in US politics is the rise of religious bloc voting over the last fifty years.

Heaps of the problems he predicted in that quote have come about as a result of religious types chasing earthly power in the exact way Jesus didn't when he was tempted by Satan. (Allegedly, if any of that happened.)

If nothing else it introduces a whole new dumb**** dynamic into the mix. Instead of other political issues the same ground has to get covered again and again. Equal rights, divorce, sexual freedom, religious freedom.... all this stuff is constantly contested so modern issues are just never faced properly. The US is basically attacking the first amendment to its constitution (v Assange in the UK) riding on the back of this shit so no one notices.

 

[ferball]

I think as Koshari says above, it's the partisanship. If Biden was a good candidate and Trump was Trump, you could make the clear argument that people should break partisanship. But when they're both crap, and one just happens to be more crap, people think "why should I break partisanship to vote for an awful candidate? Trump will be gone in either 0 or 4 years, so I'll hold ship".

It's definitely partisanship. But I don't think it would make as much difference as people think.

Heaps of people don't vote. They might if good candidates were available. That would render partisanship irrelevant in the US.

All of which is irrelevant because GIGO.

One side of US politics watches Fox and votes for Trump, the other believes in the phoney Russiagate conspiracy theory and votes for Biden (ie Hillary, whose camp he basically represents and who has been all over his campaign like a rash, the campaigner.) Doesn't really matter because the population are essentially political mushrooms. Good thing we aren't like that here in the clever, lucky, sunburnt, whateverthe**** this country is turning into now hey. We're smart. Not kept in the dark and fed shit. Not at all.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

I think as Koshari says above, it's the partisanship. If Biden was a good candidate and Trump was Trump, you could make the clear argument that people should break partisanship. But when they're both crap, and one just happens to be more crap, people think "why should I break partisanship to vote for an awful candidate? Trump will be gone in either 0 or 4 years, so I'll hold ship".

All good, but another 4 years of Trump is surely something to be avoided. I'm not of the view that another 4 years is neither here nor there - it needs to be another zero years.

Biden is inept and probably corrupt, but he will at least attempt to do the right thing by the American people in some important areas. He might well end up a puppet, but there is probably precedent for that and it's not terrible per se. Is there a risk that the Democrats gaining power could be worse for the US than the current set up? Yes, there's a risk, but it's unlikely that the country could be led as poorly as it is now.

 

[koshari]

All good, but another 4 years of Trump is surely something to be avoided. I'm not of the view that another 4 years is neither here nor there - it needs to be another zero years.

Biden is inept and probably corrupt, but he will at least attempt to do the right thing by the American people in some important areas. He might well end up a puppet, but there is probably precedent for that and it's not terrible per se. Is there a risk that the Democrats gaining power could be worse for the US than the current set up? Yes, there's a risk, but it's unlikely that the country could be led as poorly as it is now.

People have different opinions in what is important and whats not, for example a mate of mine living in Austin has a real bee in his bonnet about the whole "show and carry" firearm laws. hes pissed he isnt allowed to take his firearm into his local bar because guns are banned from establishments that make 51% or more of their income from alcohol sales.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

People have different opinions in what is important and whats not, for example a mate of mine living in Austin has a real bee in his bonnet about the whole "show and carry" firearm laws. hes pissed he isnt allowed to take his firearm into his local bar because guns are banned from establishments that make 51% or more of their income from alcohol sales.

View attachment 977200

Fair point.

Lack of appropriate education has a big part to play, of course.

 

[ferball]

People have different opinions in what is important and whats not, for example a mate of mine living in Austin has a real bee in his bonnet about the whole "show and carry" firearm laws. hes pissed he isnt allowed to take his firearm into his local bar because guns are banned from establishments that make 51% or more of their income from alcohol sales.

View attachment 977200

Has your mate ever thought thru the logic of that particular bit of legislation?

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Has your mate ever thought thru the logic of that particular bit of legislation?

Sounds like a good rule to me. Drunk and angry and holding a firearm is not a great combination.

 

[DesertRoo]

Sounds like a good rule to me. Drunk and angry and holding a firearm is not a great combination.

Take out the angry part and I don’t see a problem with it..
I had many a drunkard argument that couldve been sorted out.. instead of learning about another’s view, I could’ve just ended their bigoted ways and moved on..
I likely.

 

[see see]

Sounds like a good rule to me. Drunk and angry and holding a firearm is not a great combination.

As this forum demonstrates on a regular basis, being drunk and/or angry and having internet access is bad enough.

 

[Gasometer]

As this forum demonstrates on a regular basis, being drunk and/or angry and having internet access is bad enough.

Grand Final night is always a highlight for epic melts on BF.

But if it’s a Lions V Port GF I will be watching the Home Shopping Network

 

[koshari]

Has your mate ever thought thru the logic of that particular bit of legislation?

I really dont discuss that $hit with him any more. Thats why were still mates. From what i can gather i believe his rationale is that the bar and grill down the road doesnt just sell drinks so comes in under the 51%.

Last time i discussed it with him he said it was his legal right and had permits to own and operate a firearm and he should be able to do so, he wasnt impressed when i said i can legally operate a 20 tonne slewing crane but it was the furthest most thaught in my mind when choosing what bar to go to.

 

[ferball]

I reckon at one point Texas was genuinely worried there would be no one left if they didn't ban guns from bars. Imagine how many people got shot or hung (after getting drunk and shooting someone) cos of booze?

Someone got charged and did five months before the charges were dropped after attending an open carry protest with Huey P Newton Gun Clubbers at a BLM rally five years ago. Two years after the event. Apparently Austin has a "fusion centre" run by the Austin cops that coordinates spying on Twexans for the cops and Feds. It's called the Austin Regional Inteligence Centre. It sounds like the sort of thing the second amendment was created to shoot at...

 

[ferball]

I like that typo - Twexans. Elements Fudd must have been one.

 

[bengrina]

Morning all, Was hoping someone would be able to help me with a tax/health related query. I recently contacted my private health provider to see if I was able to get a better rate on my insurance. They then advised me that I didn't have 'hospital cover' and that you pay additional tax if you don't have this? I was surprised that they mentioned this. I have been seeing my accountant for a few years and they had never mentioned that I should have hospital cover on top of my private health insurance for tax reduction?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Morning all, Was hoping someone would be able to help me with a tax/health related query. I recently contacted my private health provider to see if I was able to get a better rate on my insurance. They then advised me that I didn't have 'hospital cover' and that you pay additional tax if you don't have this? I was surprised that they mentioned this. I have been seeing my accountant for a few years and they had never mentioned that I should have hospital cover on top of my private health insurance for tax reduction?

It's just another corporate lie.

I opted out of medicare because I found out that I was paying for insurance on things that didn't even apply to my sexual biology.

They rort you in their "packaged bundles".

I need to be insured for 3 things, heart attack, cancers and strokes. Nothing else. Try getting a policy that just covers that.