Society & Culture Things in life you just don't understand - Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are worse things than under-age drinking.We got drug tested at work and old mate thought he'd dupe the test by using his 12yo daughters urine.
He got the sack for testing positive for meth.

Maybe he should buy her a smartphone?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

i love driving it, its a big heavy car, but once you put the boot into it it can fly, i have tested the 0-100km and its pretty close to the suggested time of 5.5sec, i have a 3 inch exhaust on it so it sounds like a V8, not the pissy sound you get from HSV
Only good for the comfy interior imo
More expensive to rego, repair, is noisier so attracts more cop attention, is more expensive to buy and modify and is slower than a turbo six
Pulled up next to a 427 gts, dude in his 60s with his buy bride.
He just got me, not by much yet has 100 more KW in a heavier car and spent an absolute shitload of coin pushing 100 grand compared to my 25 grand

Gotta say id take the grange over the ugly gts tho
 
Afghanistan isn't in the Commonwealth of Nations.


The game of cricket is essentially an English Colonial export....It spread to both Afghanistan & Bangladesh via the sub-continent after partition, as indeed Sri Lanka....Rhodesia adopted it from their apartheid neighbours in South Africa, before changing their name from the Colonialist Mining giant to Zimbabwe....The West Indies also informed an important trade route of the British Empire, where the game also took hold & flourished.

The game of cricket betrays a historical thread of British Imperial influence, wherever it is played.
 
The game of cricket is essentially an English Colonial export....It spread to both Afghanistan & Bangladesh via the sub-continent after partition, as indeed Sri Lanka....Rhodesia adopted it from their apartheid neighbours in South Africa, before changing their name from the Colonialist Mining giant to Zimbabwe....The West Indies also informed an important trade route of the British Empire, where the game also took hold & flourished.

The game of cricket betrays a historical thread of British Imperial influence, wherever it is played.

ICC started in the Titanic days and refused to let in non-British Empire members until the '60s. Not a smart decision.
 
Why do all the grounds in the AFL need a section of turf between the boundary line and fence?
For players to land on when tackled? slide on when taking a diving mark etc, that's the issue with the artificial turf at Marvel, not great for either of those things
 
That's the turf I mean. Every ground now has lawn until a metre maybe past the line then a section of astro turf before the fence. Why not just have all lawn?

The first couple of meters is for players safety & to help avoid injuries, by providing for a soft landing & buffer-zone....The astro-turf is for warm-ups & provides a non-slip surface at the busy interchange section.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That's the turf I mean. Every ground now has lawn until a metre maybe past the line then a section of astro turf before the fence. Why not just have all lawn?
Oh yeah im with you now.
Too much traffic i imagine.

Cant have the all those people walking the perimiter or sitting in random folding chairs deal with a little mud also
 
Why would anyone buy a gts? Is it because they need one?

There's a certain level of 'fun' that can be achieved in a big loud heavy rear wheel drive V8. Yes, they aren't the fastest, comfiest, or most luxurious vehicles out there, but there's those intangibles of motoring where they absolutely deliver.

Now, I wouldn't buy one personally, a regular SS or a second hand HSV or the like is plenty, but I understand why others do.

The HQ is a good balance, I can put the pedal to the floor in regular traffic, hear and feel the motor kicking in, but it is old, and not so fast it isn't easily controlled and at risk of causing an accident. Do that in a modern sports car and it's ridiculously dangerous I reckon. There is too much power for 99% of driving.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
It rare that anything that Taylor Swift does interests me but how in this day and age with everything we know about the music industry does she not own the rights to her own work, did she even get a lawyer to look over he first contract?
Similar thing happened with Springsteen. Landau owned all his music royalties on his first few albums. Spent two years in court (hence the three year gap between Born To Run and Darkness), but he got what was his in the end.

Very odd though as you allude to.
 
It's not that odd at all.

Happened when majors controlled everything and happens more now as small labels need all the cash they can get and majors are desperate.

I love a bit of Taylor. She's a good songwriter with strong melodies, her wordplay can be smart, and she knows what word sounds work with what melodies. Great live show. Good looking. Permeates culture. Not really sold on her aesthetics or eras post-1989 but yeah, I'm a fan. She is a pretty crap person though.

I just find it very hard to really feel sympathetic to her. Entertainment is full of lecherous money chasers. Yeah it sucks that you make what you consider to be art and you can't choose if it's on ads or not but she's a multi-millionaire who will continue to be a multi-millionaire. The average person has to eat a lot more than that for less money and doesn't get to engage a passion for it.

Maybe her parents should have actually been level headed people and consider what they were opting a teenager into.

They saw the dollar signs and potential from a major label and signed it.

She should be lucky she didn't sign one of those 360 deals most bands are on now, where it's not just rights from recorded material. It's merch, tour, movie appearance, image income.

Everyone knows major labels are crooked, in fact most independents are as well, and you need to siphon through as much as possible. Even large alternative acts like Mac DeMarco were reamed by 'DIY' labels. Captured Tracks made him sit on albums for six months and do constant interviews, mandated he bring out demo recordings, and even took a huge cut of his touring income. He left them to make his own subsidiary under Columbia or something. Guess he's got the clout to do that now but he doesn't have the money of his own, or pull at Columbia, to buy back his masters. Radiohead only got theirs back from EMI after XL Recordings got a deal with them.

If you're 21 and in a rock band, maybe you just have to accept that not owning your masters is the price you pay to live a rare life. Or you can say no and try and pay for your own tour van to play Milwaukee and Idaho and hope enough blogs pick you up on their own volition.

Ultimately Taylor Swift wanted success, fame, and money and not many people get that without compromise.
 
Also she's amazing at creating pity and making everything a sexism debate despite the fact she's rich as * and always has been, she's from white bred Pennsylvania, she's pretty, and she's straight. Get that one.

She'll do this so people feel sorry for her and she'll work out a deal with her new label and Apple or some s**t so she recoups the rights.

She can afford to buy her own masters and she'll do it. She's got the pull to negotiate a deal. 'Help me buy them back and I'll give you exclusive release dates, I'll make your festivals the first ones I play, and I'll put all my albums out on your label and go on all the talk shows the company owns.'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top