POST STUFF
|
 by Slapnuts, Level 70
Last updated at November 25, 2008, 5:29 am
|
|
President elect Obama may apparently delay the tax hike for the rich that he touted so often during that campaign of "change" and peoples champ, if you smell what I am cooking. Considering all the money he plans on spending, from bailouts to economic stimulus etc., I am not sure this is all that great of an idea.
McDonalds has filed a patent for making sanwiches. Seriously, because they invented that **** for sure. They do have some sort of specific flow chart that they patented, but I can't believe something like this would hold up as a valid patent. I love Top Gear, unfortunately I don't get to watch it on TV. If I want to check it out I need to download it or result to Youtube clips. On digg today they had the top 14 moments in Top Gear history. Check them out, clips included!
I Am Legend 2? With Will Smith returning? What kind of bull**** nonsense is this? What is next, "Star Wars 7 - Return of the burnt to crisp by my son on Endor, Darth Vader". Come on, the Fresh Prince died in that ****, no sequels!
National Geographic has some sweet underwater footage of a squid with elbows. Taken out in the Gulf of Mexico by a Shell Oil ROV, the footage shows the coolest squid since the Watchmen and definitely looks like the one kind of seafood I would never eat.
Another fight video that defines greatness. This sucker punch is brutal and the damn car doesn't help one bit:
Report Post
42 comments
6 replies to SupaSJGokuu (hide)
6 replies to SupaSJGokuu (show)
Permalink
Post Reply
Reply to this comment
Slapnuts Nov 25, 2008 at 6:06 am
+1 votes
I did, but in the theatrical cut, which is canon, he dies.
scamp Nov 25, 2008 at 6:41 am
+1 votes
It's hard to call it canon when it doesn't even follow the novel
Slapnuts Nov 25, 2008 at 6:50 am
+1 votes
I realize it doesnt, but it is still movie canon. What are they going to do, show the dvd cut footage before the next movie? It is retarded and a big FU to people to that watched it.
vanilla Nov 25, 2008 at 6:56 am
+0 votes
It's supposed to be a prequel, mostly showing what happened between the outbreak and the beginning of the movie (the stuff you see in the flashbacks, don't want to spoiler)
Slapnuts Nov 25, 2008 at 7:09 am
+1 votes
Read the ARTICLE:
Well this change is pretty insane, the film is no longer a prequel, it's a ******* sequel!
scamp Nov 25, 2008 at 7:11 am
+1 votes
Yeah, I agree with your view. It's hard to be surprised by what Hollywood pulls though.
Qlimax Nov 25, 2008 at 6:05 am
+1 votes
Come on, the Fresh Prince died in that ****, no sequels!
It might be a prequel to explain the back story, perhaps? Which would be great, but very boring :|
That squid is ******* awesome, but it's strange, it says it was filmed a year ago, was that site just late to publish that or was it only just released to the public?
It might be a prequel to explain the back story, perhaps? Which would be great, but very boring :|
That squid is ******* awesome, but it's strange, it says it was filmed a year ago, was that site just late to publish that or was it only just released to the public?
Slapnuts Nov 25, 2008 at 6:07 am
+1 votes
It might be, but according to the latest reports it was changed from a prequel to a sequel...
Korgathishere Nov 25, 2008 at 6:10 am
+1 votes
Top Gear is the best show on TV now that the Simpsons is horrible. Anybody know of a good site to watch episodes from?
nzgs Nov 25, 2008 at 6:51 am
+1 votes
finalgear is good for people outside the UK, otherwise you can watch bbc iplayer.
Stryider Nov 25, 2008 at 8:33 am
+1 votes
There is a version that Adam Carolla hosts in America. Not sure of the channel or when it airs but there is a Top Gear USA.
oradol Nov 25, 2008 at 8:24 am
-1 votes
President elect Obama may apparently delay the tax hike for the rich that he touted so often during that campaign of "change" and peoples champ, if you smell what I am cooking. Considering all the money he plans on spending, from bailouts to economic stimulus etc., I am not sure this is all that great of an idea.
Yes, and now everyone who shat on him for his "socialist" tax policies will now just **** on him for renegging, so it's a lose-lose for him anyway. As for the reasoning, I can only imagine that it's because you would have to be an idiot to raise taxes on investors during a credit crunch. This doesn't mean he won't do it, it just means he won't do it now and economically it makes a whole lot of sense.
Yes, and now everyone who shat on him for his "socialist" tax policies will now just **** on him for renegging, so it's a lose-lose for him anyway. As for the reasoning, I can only imagine that it's because you would have to be an idiot to raise taxes on investors during a credit crunch. This doesn't mean he won't do it, it just means he won't do it now and economically it makes a whole lot of sense.
Stryider Nov 25, 2008 at 8:35 am
+4 votes
Then why did he run his whole campaign on it? Oh yeah, because he's a ******* liar and is no different than the supposed entrenched politicians. This is just another clear example of campaign bull****. Where's that lady that was talking about not having to worry about paying her rent and putting gas in her car now?
oradol Nov 25, 2008 at 8:46 am
-1 votes
He didn't say he isn't going to do it, he said he isn't going to do it now. Big difference. What do you suggest? That he follows through on it anyway -Â cutting down on investment, decreasing cash flows, causing business to go under and employees to lose their jobs? I'm all for holding politicians to their promises but not when doing so isn't in the best interests of anyone. Raising taxes in a year or so after this mess has been cleaned up is a far better option.
Slapnuts Nov 25, 2008 at 12:39 pm
+1 votes
Glad to see my inference wasn't too subtle. 
Â
Pretty obvious how this was one of his key selling points, about how he was going to make them pay again, share the wealth, blah blah blah. Now it is just excessive spending with little recouping of funds.
 Pretty obvious how this was one of his key selling points, about how he was going to make them pay again, share the wealth, blah blah blah. Now it is just excessive spending with little recouping of funds.
Vir Nov 25, 2008 at 9:29 am
+1 votes
I can only imagine that it's because you would have to be an idiot to raise taxes on investors during a credit crunch.
You don't raise taxes during a recession according to Keynesian economic policy which is religion in Washington nowadays. Â
I think Obama realized the whole time he wasn't going to be able to pull this one off.  If he raises taxes, it has a good chance of lowering revenue and discouraging investment.  It was just good campaigning to appeal to peoples envy and claim he was going to raise taxes on the rich.
Â
I wonder if he'll come out and say anything about the capital gains tax as well.  If I was planning on getting out of the market in the next 4 years,  I'd get out before the Obama  capital gains tax.
Â
You don't raise taxes during a recession according to Keynesian economic policy which is religion in Washington nowadays. Â
I think Obama realized the whole time he wasn't going to be able to pull this one off.  If he raises taxes, it has a good chance of lowering revenue and discouraging investment.  It was just good campaigning to appeal to peoples envy and claim he was going to raise taxes on the rich.
Â
I wonder if he'll come out and say anything about the capital gains tax as well.  If I was planning on getting out of the market in the next 4 years,  I'd get out before the Obama  capital gains tax.
Â
oradol Nov 25, 2008 at 9:57 am
+1 votes
I wouldn't be entirely surprised to see him raise some form of taxes in 3 years as his second term looms. I'm glad that he's being realistic enough to at least temporarily write off his tax hike when it's in the best interest of the country to do so. While I don't agree with politicians not upholding their campaign promises, it's stupid to hold them to rhetoric in situations such as this. If he can maintain a realism-over-idealism policy he'll do a much better job as President. This is a good start.
I don't know if you're familiar with Paul Martin, but this reminds me of his approach to post-election economics. If you read what I linked regarding his tenure as Finance Minister, it's pretty impressive.
I don't know if you're familiar with Paul Martin, but this reminds me of his approach to post-election economics. If you read what I linked regarding his tenure as Finance Minister, it's pretty impressive.
Vir Nov 25, 2008 at 10:19 am
+1 votes
While pragmatism is good, its comical that he campaigned so hard on that one point and now he's moving away from it. Â
Â
Â
oradol Nov 25, 2008 at 11:08 am
+1 votes
I somewhat agree, but I don't think he has much choice politically. The extent of this credit meltdown wasn't fully realized until a few months ago, whereas his campaign started in 2007? Now raising taxes on the wealthy does find economic validity and is a matter of personal opinion, but raising taxes on the wealthy during a recession certainly isn't. In an ideal world he could make this case and the rational people out there like you and I would say "he's right". In the political world rationality goes out the window because the vast majority of voters aren't. Changing his stance on the issue would inevitably be perceived (or exploited) as weakness, which while untrue is easily sold to most voters.
Let's be honest, his average working-class supporter with a mid-low income and little education doesn't understand two ****s about economics, even if you dumb it down for him. He doesn't understand that a policy which might save him his job in the long term is better than a policy that leaves him with an extra $500 in his pocket at the end of the year. If you take that cheque away he feels betrayed. He's no longer looking out of the everyman, so you perceive his opponent (with identical tax policies) is. I just don't see any way he could spin it.
Let's be honest, his average working-class supporter with a mid-low income and little education doesn't understand two ****s about economics, even if you dumb it down for him. He doesn't understand that a policy which might save him his job in the long term is better than a policy that leaves him with an extra $500 in his pocket at the end of the year. If you take that cheque away he feels betrayed. He's no longer looking out of the everyman, so you perceive his opponent (with identical tax policies) is. I just don't see any way he could spin it.
Adiara Nov 25, 2008 at 9:58 am
+1 votes
do US government economists really worship Keynesian policy? isn't it very dated and shallow compared to other macroeconomic models?
Vir Nov 25, 2008 at 10:19 am
+1 votes
Seems like it to me, at least that is always what they quote. Â Probably the people at the fed are a little more informed.
Â
Â
oradol Nov 25, 2008 at 10:53 am
+1 votes
Not exactly. Keynes' original model is very basic in that it asserts the government is able to stimulate private sector development through indirect means such as tax policy, rather than directly financing projects. That same belief system is still widely embraced, largely because it's accepted at the microeconomic level that a company establishing itself under favourable economic conditions will wind up stronger than one being propped up in a market it might otherwise not succeed in.
Newer models still use Keynesian fundamentals, but tend to be more rational. Traditional economics always take a laissez faire approach, while now we lean more towards government becoming more directly involved and stimulating demand. This is where New Keynesian economics come in. They don't suggest using monetary policy to foster growth (which would lead to inflation) but to stabilize the economy. The Wall Street bailout sort of falls under this, but that was very pooly executed.
Microeconomics are more my area of interest, I don't know as much about micro.
Newer models still use Keynesian fundamentals, but tend to be more rational. Traditional economics always take a laissez faire approach, while now we lean more towards government becoming more directly involved and stimulating demand. This is where New Keynesian economics come in. They don't suggest using monetary policy to foster growth (which would lead to inflation) but to stabilize the economy. The Wall Street bailout sort of falls under this, but that was very pooly executed.
Microeconomics are more my area of interest, I don't know as much about micro.
Lusitania Nov 25, 2008 at 8:27 am
+1 votes
Jeremy Clarkson (Top Gear) is a totally un-PC amusing guy.
He recently got into trouble for offending long distance lorry drivers by saying their long haul jobs were easy and only involved the following:
"Change gear, change gear, change gear, check mirror, murder a prostitute, change gear, change gear, murder..."
A newspaper's response:
"His crass remark on Sunday night's BBC2 show infuriated relatives of women murdered by truckers Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe and Suffolk Strangler Steve Wright - as well as Britain's army of lorry drivers."
Clarkson doesn't care who he upsets.
Also, not too long ago, he argued in his newspaper column that the recent loss of government CDs that contained the personal data of millions of citizens, wasn't such a big deal at all. To highlight his point, he printed his bank details in the same newspaper article and mocked the idea of "identity theft".
Using his details, somebody set up a £500 direct debit to a charity organisation, as they don't need written signatures to draw funds from your account.
Amazing stuff.
He replied later: "Contrary to what I said at the time, we must go after the idiots who lost the discs and stick cocktail sticks in their eyes until they beg for mercy."
He recently got into trouble for offending long distance lorry drivers by saying their long haul jobs were easy and only involved the following:
"Change gear, change gear, change gear, check mirror, murder a prostitute, change gear, change gear, murder..."
A newspaper's response:
"His crass remark on Sunday night's BBC2 show infuriated relatives of women murdered by truckers Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe and Suffolk Strangler Steve Wright - as well as Britain's army of lorry drivers."
Clarkson doesn't care who he upsets.
Also, not too long ago, he argued in his newspaper column that the recent loss of government CDs that contained the personal data of millions of citizens, wasn't such a big deal at all. To highlight his point, he printed his bank details in the same newspaper article and mocked the idea of "identity theft".
Using his details, somebody set up a £500 direct debit to a charity organisation, as they don't need written signatures to draw funds from your account.
Amazing stuff.
He replied later: "Contrary to what I said at the time, we must go after the idiots who lost the discs and stick cocktail sticks in their eyes until they beg for mercy."
Galacian Nov 25, 2008 at 8:35 am
+1 votes
The number 1 top gear video on that list was wow, just wow...
Emptyishness Nov 25, 2008 at 9:41 am
+1 votes
Let's be serious, the first film did nothing but rape the book. It completely left out Matheson's attempts to rationalize vampirism, and it like half tried to cover the whole theme of humanity but then sorta forgot about it as the end of the movie came around. Sequel, prequel, whatever, whole thing is dead to me. I cannot fathom what the person that wrote that "script" was thinking.
Godsmak Nov 25, 2008 at 11:53 am
+1 votes
Uhm well they didn't really copy the book as a whole and I think that was the point. I actually enjoyed the whole theme of it, the zombie/vamps mix, etc... I dunno, I have spoken to others who are diehard about the book and they would agree with you, all opinions.
Wadsworth1 Nov 25, 2008 at 10:30 pm
+1 votes
Its Hollywood son. They rape everything and make it worse.
Godsmak Nov 25, 2008 at 11:51 am
+1 votes
I Am Legend 2? With Will Smith returning? What kind of bull**** nonsense is this? What is next, "Star Wars 7 - Return of the burnt to crisp by my son on Endor, Darth Vader". Come on, the Fresh Prince died in that ****, no sequels!
Honestly, I loved I Am Legend, the book is amazing, the original Omega Man is the ****. I wouldn't mind a IAL2, just don't think it would work with Will Smith. Of course there was the alternate ending in the DVD however :P
Honestly, I loved I Am Legend, the book is amazing, the original Omega Man is the ****. I wouldn't mind a IAL2, just don't think it would work with Will Smith. Of course there was the alternate ending in the DVD however :P
Virtua Nov 25, 2008 at 12:32 pm
+2 votes
yell out the ******* window that will certainly help you unemployed bastards
GameRiot's source for gaming news on the PC, console and portable front. Home of the Epic Drop!
203 Subscribers
2 Likes: 3 November 20, 2009, 11:50 pm3 Likes: 11 November 20, 2009, 9:51 pm62 Likes: 24 November 20, 2009, 1:56 pm88 Likes: 31 November 20, 2009, 5:49 am11 Likes: 10 November 20, 2009, 3:24 am34 Likes: 15 November 19, 2009, 3:35 pm39 Likes: 41 November 19, 2009, 1:35 pm43 Likes: 29 November 18, 2009, 4:15 pm77 Likes: 34 November 18, 2009, 1:37 pm76 Likes: 37 November 17, 2009, 1:07 pmStarted December 20, 2007
1969 Total Entries
1969 Total Entries
THE SPOTLIGHT
Arrested over tip, Hassan terrorist, Chuck, Avatar…
|
|
1 of 9 |
Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...