Ellen Page comes out...

[JacoIII]

Did the Ball guy say that anti-capitalism = evil? And that lesbians are all ugly? And that if it isn't the 50s then your sexuality doesn't matter?

People who believe in such sweeping statements are undoubtedly some of the dumbest people in the world. While I may not agree with ShogunRua on most things at least the dude puts thought (and maybe too much sass) behind his opinions. This Ball person hasn't said a real thing in the entire thread.

Also, I do think Page did this for some attention but that doesn't preclude her from having less selfish motivations. She could feel (and would be right) that publicly coming out inspires those who are still closeted.

EDIT: CMonster that link is amazing.

[TrixRabbi]

American politics is a cesspit. Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, Socia--(hahaha, I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to even joke that there's anything even closely resembling Socialism in US Politics right now)-- It's all garbage. The sooner we all accept this, the happier we will all be.

[ShogunRua]

Pretty sure that if Bill Clinton were a Republican, you wouldn't so blithely dismiss his sexual assault of Kathleen Willey and admitted adultery and obstruction of justice with Gennifer Flowers (as governor) and Monica Lewinsky (as president).

Not dismissing it at all. Unlike you and Stewie, who think one of your parties is better than the other, I think both are equally bad.

Your assumption is completely wrong. I don't think along "party" lines at all, but rather, consider people as individuals. Most Republicans are as awful as Democrats, and the party as a whole is depressing and terrible. I have only bad things to say about John Boehner, John McCain, Chris Christie, and Mitt Romney.

However, there are a few individuals, like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Paul Ryan, who are decent men that genuinely want to improve the country, despite how much they're demonized by the state-run media. (As well as certain members of their own party)

Just like Stewie wouldn't talk about the multiple tax increases by the Gipper and also huge increase in Govt spending under the Gipper.

Now this is just nonsense, and I'm disappointed that you would parrot a talking point without even thinking about it. You're better than that.

I'm an economist for a living, and thus have a pretty good knowledge of tax rates during modern American history. Both the overall tax rate and government spending went down drastically under Reagan. In fact, I even found a good article that addresses this piece of propaganda;

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/06/ronal ... eal-story/

(Pro tip- If you raise taxes by 10% of total salary in certain areas, and then lower them by 40% in other areas, you have lowered taxes on the whole, not raised them. Incidentally, Reagan is the only president since WW2 for whom overall tax rates were lower when he left office than when he entered it. Off the top of my head, that also caused the unemployment rate to go from 9% to 5.5% during his presidency, as well as large gains in mean AND median household income)

And FWIW, Clinton with all his faults was 10 times better than your current and last pres as far as running the country was concerned. The current and the last are incompetent, corrupt morons.

Agreed, although Obama's incompetence and corruption is so incredible it actually makes Bush Jr. look good by comparison. At least Bush Jr. was competent enough to come back from the 2000 recession at the tail end of Clinton's presidency (which most non-economists, yourself included, choose to ignore these days) by 2002, whereas Obama made the 2008 Bush Jr recession far, far worse and long-lasting.

Not so sure about it. His father, yeah, sure. But I am pretty sure you are going to be disappointment by Rand in the long run. Rand Paul seems like an opportunist who seems to be saying the right things in preparation for the 2016 primaries. Cruz seems to be the more genuine article as compared to Rand, but I don't think he will run in 2016.

We will see. But yes, I like his father, too.

I think it's competing with a few more topics where Stewie has spouted random rubbish.

What about the djross list topics where everyone posts a random number? Or post random movies in a random order with no explanation? While the signal-to-noise ratio is very low in those Stewie topics (and perhaps zero for this one), those are a consistent zero. This might be worse, however, since it also involves Nazi avatars and discussions about dead babies.

Edit-

Did the Ball guy say that anti-capitalism = evil?

As someone born in a country where capitalism WAS considered the highest evil (the USSR), I actually agree one hundred percent with him there. It's the one true statement he made among a menagerie of nonsense and exaggeration.

[ShogunRua]

If you think these forums get ruined by trolls and rubbish, you know nothing.

50,000+ people trying to simultaneously play pokemon red.

I thought this graph was quite hilarious and telling;

[JacoIII]

As someone born in a country where capitalism WAS considered the highest evil (the USSR), I actually agree one hundred percent with him there. It's the one true statement he made among a menagerie of nonsense and exaggeration.

Anti-capitalism isn't evil by nature. Neither is capitalism. Both allow for evil people to thrive under the right circumstances. You came from a country that had a pretty shitty take on anti-capitalism, but anti-capitalism also gives millions of people access to universal healthcare. Capitalism gives them access to useful products, but capitalism can also result in those products being produced by children for pennies an hour.

You know it's more nuanced than anti-capitalism = evil.

[ShogunRua]

As someone born in a country where capitalism WAS considered the highest evil (the USSR), I actually agree one hundred percent with him there. It's the one true statement he made among a menagerie of nonsense and exaggeration.

Anti-capitalism isn't evil by nature.

Believe me, I completely understood why you think this way. In theory, socialism has always been a very attractive idea. Why not? A benevolent government to take care of the people! And protect them from those evil corporations! What could be better?!

But those who have never lived and suffered under true socialism can never understand what it really means. In practice, the evil and tyranny of a government is 100 times worse and more oppressive than the most greedy caricature of a private company that has ever exited.

You came from a country that had a pretty shitty take on anti-capitalism, but anti-capitalism also gives millions of people access to universal healthcare.

That has been the eternal rallying cry. Even many young people in Russia today, who grew up after the collapse of the Soviet Union, believe this. "The system is fine, it was just the wrong people in power!" But those that lived under socialism, and remember it, simply laugh.

Socialism creates tyrants, oppression, and misery by its very nature. It has ALWAYS created tyrants, oppression, and misery. There has never been an exception.

Many countries today, particularly the US and Europe, occupy a strange never-region between capitalism and socialism. Thus, they avoid the tyranny and outright oppression, but suffer through a weak economy, high unemployment rates, and a loss of personal freedom. And the closer to socialism the country is, the worse its fortunes are.

However, it's inching closer to socialism every day, to the point where most of my older Russian relatives are alarmed at how similar the very rhetoric and laws are becoming to what they lived in during the 60s and 70s. Granted, that was and Khrushchev and Brezhnev, not Stalin, but it's small comfort. (Also, it reminds me of the pigs looking more and more like the humans in "Animal Farm")

You know it's more nuanced than anti-capitalism = evil.

Speaking of anti-capitalism, if you want an amusing laugh, here is something I posted on my Facebook last month, with a link at the top. (This is the closest I get to discussing political issues on there)

http://innovationprinciples.blogspot.co ... sible.html

An interesting, enlightening, and funny little article. (Well, unless you live in France) Briefly summarizing it, in 1981 France passed the Lange Law, which allowed publishers to determine book prices, with retailers allowed a maximum discount of 5%. The rationale was to allow smaller bookstores to compete against larger chains.

Well, 30+ years later, and we have Amazon. They can offer that 5% discount as well as a wider selection with better service. What to do? Why, pass a law making them choose between that 5% discount and "free shipping", that's what! They can't have both. Hilariously enough, the writer over at TechCrunch describes this is as a GOOD thing. (Who knew Luddites get to report for major technology sites?!)

My favorite funny comment is below the TechCrunch article;

"I sure hope they put in protection for buggy whip makers too. Look at the devastation the automobile industry has had on them and that's not fair."

My favorite serious comment is in the piece below linking to it;

"The idea that authors write books to benefit bookstores and publishers instead of the reader is preposterous. The French government is taking a deliberate action to stop innovation, so that an 18th century business model for delivering books from authors to people could live a little bit longer."

[JacoIII]

Believe me, I completely understood why you think this way. In theory, socialism has always been a very attractive idea. Why not? A benevolent government to take care of the people! And protect them from those evil corporations! What could be better?!

I now realize that I may have been using "anti-capitalism" incorrectly. Socializing certain things isn't awful, neither is regulating certain things about corporations but I don't think the government should be in charge of everything. I'm just saying I don't support unbridled capitalism.

[Ag0stoMesmer]

I now realize that I may have been using "anti-capitalism" incorrectly. Socializing certain things isn't awful, neither is regulating certain things about corporations but I don't think the government should be in charge of everything. I'm just saying I don't support unbridled capitalism.

It is only proper to be against Capitalism, it's a rotten system. Socialism is far better -until concentrations of power (governments and other such corruptions) occur. Cmonster's got it right when he draws attention to the fact comedians voice these things better, Charlie Chaplin -via his son for instance.

Ellen page comes out as gay and Shogun comes out as an Economist -not a scientist. Another strange Criticker thread but I thought her little speech was lovely, the way her voice came so close to cracking; not in that pause-blink-pretend-you're-about-to-cry TED-talks sentimental bullshit way, for real, awww.

[thehynes]

Naw...really!!!?? Even if she was but didn't know it, she had to be, she always had a chip on her shoulder. That or being liberal and/or ugly are dead giveaways for women. At least gay men have a sense of humor.

dick

[Spanks]

It is only proper to be against Capitalism, it's a rotten system. Socialism is far better

I read a quote recently that seems fitting:

“They do say that socialism is the ideal philosophy - just as long as you have capitalists to pay for it.” ― Wilbur Smith