https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
the reason that trump is the best choice for the republicans is that he has a legitimate chance of swinging partisan democrats - those traditionally working class, union-stiff types (mostly white) that are, today, kind of irked about their employment prospects, and may end up preferring trump's analysis over sanders', god bless their uneducated souls.
at
13:07
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
Daniel65
Buying Sun newspapers was a waste of money. It's a right wing rag that the general public ignores.
jessica murray
actually, i think shutting down the sun chain - if that's what this works out as - is the greatest thing to happen to canadian journalism since the internet.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/postmedia-job-cuts-1.3410497
Buying Sun newspapers was a waste of money. It's a right wing rag that the general public ignores.
jessica murray
actually, i think shutting down the sun chain - if that's what this works out as - is the greatest thing to happen to canadian journalism since the internet.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/postmedia-job-cuts-1.3410497
at
11:12
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
a quarter of a percent cut will not have any effect on anything or anyone at all.
well, that's not completely true. it will reduce interest on the debt.
just keep it above zero, please.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/bank-of-canada-rate-advancer-1.3408694
well, that's not completely true. it will reduce interest on the debt.
just keep it above zero, please.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/bank-of-canada-rate-advancer-1.3408694
at
10:02
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
i think this guy might be missing the idea that the attacks are ironic - sounds kind of like what we've been hearing *from* alberta directed at the rest of the country for decades now, doesn't it?
pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, alberta. quit yer whining, too.
maybe it would do them some good to freeze in the dark for a little bit. take them down a notch.
it's truly honestly hard to care - because they've simply never reciprocated.
the best introduction to reciprocal altruism that i'm aware of is a film by dawkins, although i cannot recall the name of it. alberta has been playing a losing strategy. and, it's just catching up to it.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/letter-from-oilpatch-worker-to-trudeau-incites-backlash-1.3410343
pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, alberta. quit yer whining, too.
maybe it would do them some good to freeze in the dark for a little bit. take them down a notch.
it's truly honestly hard to care - because they've simply never reciprocated.
the best introduction to reciprocal altruism that i'm aware of is a film by dawkins, although i cannot recall the name of it. alberta has been playing a losing strategy. and, it's just catching up to it.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/letter-from-oilpatch-worker-to-trudeau-incites-backlash-1.3410343
at
09:15
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
see, i don't...
can a conservative explain to me why you want to be at this meeting?
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-not-invited-isis-paris-meeting-1.3409420
Kopaja _Avenger
I'm not a conservative but I'll try to explain. Being in that room actually allows Canada to sway the group to a plan that actually may work. If we are not in the room we cant tell others why the agreed to plan may fail or garner opposite to desired results (which keeps on happening).
jessica murray
yeah, you're not a conservative - you're too naive.
imrighton
It should be obvious but then you ask that a "conservative" give you an explanation. So you are no doubt a Lib partisan playing dumb.
We are engaged in a war Jessica. Our allies are holding important strategic, planning sessions. We aren't invited. Decisions will be made affecting our military operations and Canada won't have a say. We have been sent to the kid's table.
jessica murray
well, no. i've been over this many times. i'm many degrees to the left of the liberal party.
you're not really answering the question: why, exactly, do you want to be involved in this war?
i mean, from my perspective it was more like we were stuck in something we couldn't get out of. we didn't really have the choice of withdrawal. if the americans are going to give us that option, i'd say we should jump at it.
can a conservative explain to me why you want to be at this meeting?
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-not-invited-isis-paris-meeting-1.3409420
Kopaja _Avenger
I'm not a conservative but I'll try to explain. Being in that room actually allows Canada to sway the group to a plan that actually may work. If we are not in the room we cant tell others why the agreed to plan may fail or garner opposite to desired results (which keeps on happening).
jessica murray
yeah, you're not a conservative - you're too naive.
imrighton
It should be obvious but then you ask that a "conservative" give you an explanation. So you are no doubt a Lib partisan playing dumb.
We are engaged in a war Jessica. Our allies are holding important strategic, planning sessions. We aren't invited. Decisions will be made affecting our military operations and Canada won't have a say. We have been sent to the kid's table.
jessica murray
well, no. i've been over this many times. i'm many degrees to the left of the liberal party.
you're not really answering the question: why, exactly, do you want to be involved in this war?
i mean, from my perspective it was more like we were stuck in something we couldn't get out of. we didn't really have the choice of withdrawal. if the americans are going to give us that option, i'd say we should jump at it.
at
08:03
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
this is a great example of how clueless the media is.
rate cuts have to be really big to affect the economy. if you want to buy a house, are you going to change your mind because the interest rate is a quarter of a percent lower? if it even *is*? there's no guarantee that the central bank changing it's inter-bank lending rate will have any effect on interest rates that you or i have to deal with. that's still an external market. and, if you weren't thinking about buying a house, is a quarter of a percent going to make you jump at it?
a three-five percent change might make you change your mind. a 0.25% change? it's like it didn't even happen, right.
the bank knows that. the government knows that. economists know that. it's only the media that doesn't know this.
so, why do this?
the answer is that the government is about to create a lot of debt through stimulus spending. that's actually not bad, either, because the economy is dead - although see my recent repost on keynes for some healthy skepticism. but, if you're going to create a lot of debt, it is optimal to do so in an environment with minimal interest rates - because then you're paying less interest on the debt.
the article says nothing about this. you won't find one that does. it says something about not needing to cut rates because of the stimulus spending. which is total fucking derp derp derp.....
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bank-of-canada-rate-advancer-1.3408694
rate cuts have to be really big to affect the economy. if you want to buy a house, are you going to change your mind because the interest rate is a quarter of a percent lower? if it even *is*? there's no guarantee that the central bank changing it's inter-bank lending rate will have any effect on interest rates that you or i have to deal with. that's still an external market. and, if you weren't thinking about buying a house, is a quarter of a percent going to make you jump at it?
a three-five percent change might make you change your mind. a 0.25% change? it's like it didn't even happen, right.
the bank knows that. the government knows that. economists know that. it's only the media that doesn't know this.
so, why do this?
the answer is that the government is about to create a lot of debt through stimulus spending. that's actually not bad, either, because the economy is dead - although see my recent repost on keynes for some healthy skepticism. but, if you're going to create a lot of debt, it is optimal to do so in an environment with minimal interest rates - because then you're paying less interest on the debt.
the article says nothing about this. you won't find one that does. it says something about not needing to cut rates because of the stimulus spending. which is total fucking derp derp derp.....
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bank-of-canada-rate-advancer-1.3408694
at
07:12
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
what are the oscars? what do they measure? what does it mean when somebody gets an oscar?
jada seems to be approaching the issue from the same lens as kayne was - that the oscars actually legitimately reflect excellency in the field of acting. so, to get an oscar is a form of recognition for that excellence. jada seems to be upset for the same reason as kanye, which is also the same reason nicki minaj was upset - they felt they produced something excellent and they should be acknowledged for that excellence. they think they won the talent show, kind of thing, and it's an injustice that they are (or their preferred choice is) being ignored.
(audience laughter)
vivian, here, seems to be taking a different perspective - namely that the oscars are a kind of promotional tool, and should be awarded not based on total excellency but on more of a needs-based basis. that is, they should go to the actors that demonstrate the best potential and need the most exposure. to vivian, the oscars should be used as a way to establish a career.
their different deductions come from their different perspectives.
if you think the oscars are all about massaging your own ego, it follows that they should only go to established icons - and so it must be all about acknowledgement. the obvious racial biases that exist across all american institutions become a clear reason to boycott the institution; because, from that perspective, it is truly all about reaching the top of a hierarchy. yet, if you think the oscars are to be seen as a launching pad that has little reflection on actual performance or actual talent, then that logic makes no sense - winning an oscar is just another public relations tactic.
so, who is right?
i'm leaning towards vivian. but, not because the oscars are racist; rather, because the oscars have no artistic credibility. if they had any credibility at all, i would agree with jada. but, they don't. so, i agree with vivian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9eY-kKXBnQ
jada seems to be approaching the issue from the same lens as kayne was - that the oscars actually legitimately reflect excellency in the field of acting. so, to get an oscar is a form of recognition for that excellence. jada seems to be upset for the same reason as kanye, which is also the same reason nicki minaj was upset - they felt they produced something excellent and they should be acknowledged for that excellence. they think they won the talent show, kind of thing, and it's an injustice that they are (or their preferred choice is) being ignored.
(audience laughter)
vivian, here, seems to be taking a different perspective - namely that the oscars are a kind of promotional tool, and should be awarded not based on total excellency but on more of a needs-based basis. that is, they should go to the actors that demonstrate the best potential and need the most exposure. to vivian, the oscars should be used as a way to establish a career.
their different deductions come from their different perspectives.
if you think the oscars are all about massaging your own ego, it follows that they should only go to established icons - and so it must be all about acknowledgement. the obvious racial biases that exist across all american institutions become a clear reason to boycott the institution; because, from that perspective, it is truly all about reaching the top of a hierarchy. yet, if you think the oscars are to be seen as a launching pad that has little reflection on actual performance or actual talent, then that logic makes no sense - winning an oscar is just another public relations tactic.
so, who is right?
i'm leaning towards vivian. but, not because the oscars are racist; rather, because the oscars have no artistic credibility. if they had any credibility at all, i would agree with jada. but, they don't. so, i agree with vivian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9eY-kKXBnQ
at
05:55
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
it is often stated that, as individuals, we produce a large amount of trash.
i'm calling bullshit on this claim. that is to say that i don't believe i create much of any trash at all. extrapolating, it would be completely inaccurate to shoulder the trash-generation burden upon all of us equally, or suggest we are all equally culpable. the truth is more along the lines of that a very small percentage of people produce an absolutely astounding amount of trash. we should be focusing on the culprits and coercing and ostracizing them to behave more responsibly as individuals, not socializing the responsibility.
to demonstrate my claim, i am going to record how long it takes for me to fill a shopping bag full of trash. it's just your standard shopping bag. and it's just every day trash.
i believe that it will take me at least a year to fill this bag worth of trash. so, how much am i *actually* adding to the landfill this year? less than a shopping bag's worth of highly compressible plastic...
that is, almost nothing at all. if i can do it, you can do it too!
i'm calling bullshit on this claim. that is to say that i don't believe i create much of any trash at all. extrapolating, it would be completely inaccurate to shoulder the trash-generation burden upon all of us equally, or suggest we are all equally culpable. the truth is more along the lines of that a very small percentage of people produce an absolutely astounding amount of trash. we should be focusing on the culprits and coercing and ostracizing them to behave more responsibly as individuals, not socializing the responsibility.
to demonstrate my claim, i am going to record how long it takes for me to fill a shopping bag full of trash. it's just your standard shopping bag. and it's just every day trash.
i believe that it will take me at least a year to fill this bag worth of trash. so, how much am i *actually* adding to the landfill this year? less than a shopping bag's worth of highly compressible plastic...
that is, almost nothing at all. if i can do it, you can do it too!
at
03:14
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)