🔥 Popular | Latest

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Save
Friends, Funny, and Relationships: dalekitsune the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" is actually not the full phrase it actually is "curiosity killed the cat but satisfaction brought it back" so don't let anyone tell you not to be a curious little baby okay go and be interested in the world uwu consultingmoosecaptain See also Blood is thieker than weter The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb Meaning that relationships formed by choice are stronger than those formed by birth. espurr-roba Let's not forget that "Jack of all trades, master of none" ends with "But better than a master of one. It means that being equally good/average at everything is much better than being perfect at one thing and sucking at everything else. So don't worry if you're not perfect at something you do! Being okay is better! thelastmellophone These made me feel better thelifeofatubaplayer Also, "great minds think alike" ends with "but fools rarely differ" It goes to show that conformity isn't always a good thing. And that just because more than one person has the same idea, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea becausetheintrovert what the fuck why haven't i heard the full version to any of these unlimitedtrashworks Birds of a feather flock together" ends with "until the cat comes. It's actually a warning about fair-weather friends, not an assessment of how complementary people are. monsters-and-teeth I've always felt like these were cut down on purpose evil-shenanigans-alpha I really like these phrases and plan on spreading this knowledge alwayswillgraham The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. its-kk-yo I want to make designs out of these. sunderlorn Funny how all the half-finished ones encourage uniformity and upholding the status-quo, while the complete proverbs encourage like.. iving exciting, eclectic lives driven by choice and personal passion. Kinda wholesome
Save
Abc, News, and Parents: DAILY NATION I Wednesday August 10, 2016 ON Video games sharpen, social media dumbs Teenagers who play video games are more likely to get better grades at school, a study told News Limited yesterday has found. average in science," study co- author Albert Posso from RMIT to understand some of the principles of chemistry; evern so, they really have to under- stand science," Mr Posso told the ABC. "Some psychologists have argued that massive online player games can be beneficial to cognitive development: Teachers should consider incorporating "When you play online However, the research also games you're solving puzzles to move to the next level and ed social media every day that involves using some of the were receiving grades 20 points general knowledge and skills in below the average in maths than maths, reading and science that you've been taught during the tablished that students who popular video games into teaching so long as they are not violent Mr Posso said the link be tween excessive social media use and poor academic results could be attributed to "oppor- tunity cost" in terms of study time. ones ose who did not. The study, released by the day" said Mr Posso. "Teachers Albert Posso, study Royal Melbourne Institute of should consider incorporat co-author Technology (RMIT), says that students who play online games daily perform, especially well in maths, science and reading ing popular video games into teaching so long as they are not violent ones." Programme for International that online gamin analyse the online habits of lem-solving skills. then compared to academic re- sults. He said the data revealed g could help "You're not really going to solve problems using (social media)," Mr Posso said Mr Posso used data from the tudents who play online games almost every day score 15 points above the average in maths and 17 points above the Australian 15-year-olds, which he "Sometimes (players) have Student Assessment (Pisa) to young people to develop prob- The research was published in the International Journal of Communication. (Xinhua) Record Pogback'> When coach shunned him, he left and shone Take this to your parents.

Take this to your parents.

Save
Abc, News, and Parents: DAILY NATION I Wednesday August 10, 2016 ON Video games sharpen, social media dumbs Teenagers who play video to get better grades at school, a study average in science," study co- author Albert Posso from RMIT told News Limited yesterday to understand some of the principles of chemistry; evern so, they really have to under stand science Mr Posso told the ABC. "Some psychologists have argued that massive online player games can be beneficial to cognitive development." games are more likely Teachers has found. "When you play online should consider However, the research also tablished that students who ed social media every day were receiving grades 20 points ow the average in maths than games you're solving puzzles to move to the next level and that involves using some of the general knowledge and skills in maths, reading and science that you've been taught during the incorporating popular video games into teaching so long as they are not violent ones co-author Mr Posso said the link be Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), says that ents who play online games daily perform, especially well in ose who did not. The study, released by the day" said Mr Posso. "Teachers Albert Posso, study should consider incorporat ing popular video games into teaching so long as they are not tween excessive social media use and poor academic results could be attributed to "oppor- tunity cost" in terms of study time then compared to academic re- You're not really going to sults. He said the data revealed solve problems using (social violent ones." Mr Posso used data from the Student Assessment (Pisa) to Australian 15-year-olds, which he maths, science and reading. national that online gaming could help media)" Mr Posso said Students who play online Programme for Inter The research was published in the International Journal of young people to develop prob- games almost every day score ls points above the average in maths and 17 points above the analyse the online habits of lem-solving skills. "Sometimes (players) have C Record Pogback'> When coach shunned him, he left and shone Take this to your parents.

Take this to your parents.

Save
Basketball, Club, and Family: COMEI CLAP FOR THIS Socio-Economic Status (SES) I. Another factor- that apes a persons identity can be his socio-economic status (SES). This refers to the social standing of an individual or group of people in society s often measured as a combination of the following four factors Education level > Income Job (e.g. White-collar vs. blue-collar) White collar refers to people who work in an office or professional environment. Blue collar refers to workers who do manual work in a factory or workshop environment. Ownership of wealth, which can take the form of the kind of house you live in (e.g. HDB flat vs. 3. In Singapore, income is usually used to measure a person's SES. Sometimes, one or more of the 4. SES can determine a person's choice of language, housing, food, entertainment and activities. This 5. Some of choices could include the following privately owned property). factors are also used to determine a person's SES can also influence friends he interacts with Lower SES Higher SES Use of formal English in daily conversation orat Use of Singlish or different dialects in daily home Sports like golf or tennis at an exclusive country club Regular fine dining at expensive restaurants conversation or at home Sports like soccer or basketball at the local HDB estate Eating at hawker centres or at home Youths taking on part-time jobs during vacation time to meet basic family needs Youths traveling overseas during school holidays credits to Ahmad Matin SOCIAL STUDIES ASSESSMENT BOOK Wtf I didn't know "Socio-Economic Status" in Singapore is defined like that

Wtf I didn't know "Socio-Economic Status" in Singapore is defined like that

Save
Hello, Love, and Shit: jumpingiacktrash vertisol ndedfunyarin dduane aurelai standbyfortitanfall thal heliosapollo losed A CROW TRIED TO GO IN OUR CLASSROOM AND HE HAD A PEN yes hello i am here to learn geometries That crow is more prepared than some of my students. You've all just like, completely skipped over the possibility that this crow has seen people using pens in this room, found one, and is trying to return it. There's been videos of crows picking up sweet wrappers and stuff and placing them in bins after seeing humans put their litter in bins. I really do believe that this crow is trying to return the pen and that is ADORABLE AS HELL THEY ARE SO SMART I LOVE THEM Crows are thought to be self aware by some scientists. Its perfectiy possible the crow wants to return the pen to humans. Knowing it belongs to humans. Corvids. Who KNOWS.) Another cool crow deal: Once, when trying to assess if crows could reason and use tools, scientists had two crows who didn't know each other each take a wire from a table (one was hooked, one was straight) and try to grab meat from a bottle with it. The crows could see each other, though they had separate bottles. Only the straight wire worked for this, so they hypothesized that if crows could reason, the second trial would have the two crows fighting over the straight wire. The second trial started and, to the surprise of the scientists, the two crows both went for the bent wire, one held it down and the other unbent it. They both got meat out of their bottles. They came to a peaceful solution without verbal communication. Crows are probably smarter than we are they still shit all over the place and eat garbage ok but so do we Obligatory reference to Unidan
Save
Being Alone, America, and Be Like: With Net Neutrality on the Chopping Block, Communities Are Taking Matters Into their Own Hands-and Scaring the Hell out of Comcasí erin-space-goat: quasi-normalcy: comcastkills: headlines I like to see Why would you post the headline but not the article? (X) https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/with-net-neutrality-on-the-chopping-block-communities_us_5a0f467de4b0e6450602eaa5 We should be loud and clear in the coming weeks like we’ve been before: net neutrality is crucial to helping everyone, regardless of where they live or how much money they make, get online. But there’s another way we can fight for an open internet. Last week, 19 towns across Colorado voted to allow the exploration of creating a local, public alternative to expensive private providers. Fort Collins voters went the furthest, passing a measure to finance an assessment of starting a city-owned broadband utility, which would aim to provide faster service at a cheaper price. That means residents could have a say in whether a new public network maintains the principle of net neutrality, whatever the FCC decides in the future. “People who don’t normally get excited or vote actually turned out this time and actually got energized,” said one resident who had campaigned for the measure. Not everyone was excited. Industry groups spent more than $450,000 campaigning against the measure. In fact, the very reason Colorado towns had to vote “yes” before even exploring public broadband is because of an industry-backed state law requiring municipalities to jump through hoops to take control of their internet infrastructure. (The industry has successfully pushed similar legislation in over 20 states.) Comcast and the like are quaking in their boots about a public option, and they should be. Cities like Chattanooga, Tennessee, which became the first U.S. city to offer gigabit internet speed after going public, are outperforming private providers and even forcing them to innovate to play catch up. Why shouldn’t internet access be a public good? The web should be like the Postal Service, which, because it’s public, provides affordable mail service to everyone, rich or poor, in all areas of the country. And why should a handful of corporate executives and investors get rich while providing expensive, slow access and unbearable customer service? Comcast’s CEO, billionaire Brian Roberts, pocketed $33 million last year alone while running America’s most hated corporation. People need the internet for life in the 21st century, to communicate, apply for jobs, and access crucial resources. Everyone should have affordable access. (17th Nov, 2017 - Donald Cohen)

erin-space-goat: quasi-normalcy: comcastkills: headlines I like to see Why would you post the headline but not the article? (X) https://ww...

Save
Friends, Funny, and Relationships: dalekitsune the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" is actually not the full phrase it actually is "curiosity killed the cat but satisfaction brought it back" so don't let anyone tell you not to be a curious little baby okay go and be interested in the world uwu consultingmoosecaptain See also: Bloed is thiekerthan water-The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb Meaning that relationships formed by choice are stronger than those formed by birth espurr-roba Let's not forget that "Jack of all trades, master of none" ends with "But better than a master of one. It means that being equally good/average at everything is much better than being perfect at one thing and sucking at everything else. So don't worry if you're not perfect at something you do! Being okay is better! thelastmellophone These made me feel better thelifeofatubaplayer Also, "great minds think alike" ends with "but fools rarely differ" It goes to show that conformity isn't always a good thing And that just because more than one person has the same idea, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea becausetheintrovert what the fuck why haven't i heard the full version to any of these unlimitedtrashworks "Birds of a feather flock together" ends with "until the cat comes." It's actually a warning about fair-weather friends, not an assessment of how complementary people are. monsters-and-teeth I've always felt like these were cut down on purpose. evil-shenanigans-alpha I really like these phrases and plan on spreading this knowledge alwayswillgraham The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese its-kk-yo I want to make designs out of these sunderlorn Funny how all the half-finished ones encourage uniformity and upholding the status-quo, while the complete proverbs encourage like...iving exciting, eclectic lives driven by choice and personal passion. More from the category sayings that have been shortened to mean the opposite of what they originally meant
Save
Friends, Funny, and Relationships: dalekitsune the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" is actually not the full phrase it actually is "curiosity killed the cat but satisfaction brought it back" so don't let anyone tell you not to be a curious little baby okay go and be interested in the world uwu consultingmoosecaptain See also The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb Meaning that relationships formed by choice are stronger than those formed by birth espurr-roba Let's not forget that "Jack of all trades, master of none" ends with "But better than a master of one." It means that being equally good/average at everything is much better than being perfect at one thing and sucking at everything else. So don't worry if you're not perfect at something you do! Being okay is better! thelastmellophone These made me feel better thelifeofatubaplayer Also, "great minds think alike" ends with "but fools rarely differ" It goes to show that conformity isn't always a good thing And that just because more than one person has the same idea, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea becausetheintrovert what the fuck why haven't i heard the full version to any of these unlimitedtrashworks "Birds of a feather flock together" ends with "until the cat comes." Its actually a warning about fair-weather friends, not an assessment of how complementary people are monsters-and-teeth I've always felt like these were cut down on purpose evil-shenanigans-alpha I really like these phrases and plan on spreading this knowledge alwayswillgraham The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese its-kk-yo I want to make designs out of these sunderlorn Funny how all the half-finished ones encourage uniformity and upholding the status-quo, while the complete proverbs encourage like..iving exciting, eclectic lives driven by choice and personal passion Rome wasn’t built in a day, but it burned in one.
Save
Friends, Funny, and God: dalekitsune the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" is actually not the full phrase it actually is "curiosity killed the cat but satisfaction brought it back" so don't let anyone tell you not to be a curious little baby okay go and be interested in the world uwu consultingmoosecaptain See also: Bloed is thiekerthan water-The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb Meaning that relationships formed by choice are stronger than those formed by birth espurr-roba Let's not forget that "Jack of all trades, master of none" ends with "But better than a master of one." It means that being equally good/average at everything is much better than being perfect at one thing and sucking at everything else. So don't worry if you're not perfect at something you do! Being okay is better! thelastmellophone These made me feel better thelifeofatubaplayer Also, "great minds think alike" ends with "but fools rarely differ" It goes to show that conformity isn't always a good thing And that just because more than one person has the same idea, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea becausetheintrovert what the fuck why haven't i heard the full version to any of these unlimitedtrashworks "Birds of a feather flock together" ends with "until the cat comes." It's actually a warning about fair-weather friends, not an assessment of how complementary people are. monsters-and-teeth I've always felt like these were cut down on purpose. evil-shenanigans-alpha I really like these phrases and plan on spreading this knowledge alwayswillgraham The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese its-kk-yo I want to make designs out of these sunderlorn Funny how all the half-finished ones encourage uniformity and upholding the status-quo, while the complete proverbs encourage like.. iving exciting, eclectic lives driven by choice and personal passion. Sweet mother of god.
Save
Friends, Funny, and God: dalekitsune the phrase "curiosity killed the cat" is actually not the full phrase it actually is "curiosity killed the cat but satisfaction brought it back" so don't let anyone tell you not to be a curious little baby okay go and be interested in the world uwu consultingmoosecaptain See also: Bloed is thiekerthan water-The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb Meaning that relationships formed by choice are stronger than those formed by birth espurr-roba Let's not forget that "Jack of all trades, master of none" ends with "But better than a master of one." It means that being equally good/average at everything is much better than being perfect at one thing and sucking at everything else. So don't worry if you're not perfect at something you do! Being okay is better! thelastmellophone These made me feel better thelifeofatubaplayer Also, "great minds think alike" ends with "but fools rarely differ" It goes to show that conformity isn't always a good thing And that just because more than one person has the same idea, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea becausetheintrovert what the fuck why haven't i heard the full version to any of these unlimitedtrashworks "Birds of a feather flock together" ends with "until the cat comes." It's actually a warning about fair-weather friends, not an assessment of how complementary people are. monsters-and-teeth I've always felt like these were cut down on purpose. evil-shenanigans-alpha I really like these phrases and plan on spreading this knowledge alwayswillgraham The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese its-kk-yo I want to make designs out of these sunderlorn Funny how all the half-finished ones encourage uniformity and upholding the status-quo, while the complete proverbs encourage like.. iving exciting, eclectic lives driven by choice and personal passion. Sweet mother of god.
Save
Hello, Love, and Shit: jumpingjacktrash: vertisol: offendedfunyarinpa: dduane: laurelai: angelalchemy: standbyfortitanfall: girlwithalessonplan: heliosapollo: losed: A CROW TRIED TO GO IN OUR CLASSROOM AND HE HAD A PEN yes hello i am here to learn geometries That crow is more prepared than some of my students. You’ve all just like, completely skipped over the possibility that this crow has seen people using pens in this room, found one, and is trying to return it. There’s been videos of crows picking up sweet wrappers and stuff and placing them in bins after seeing humans put their litter in bins. I really do believe that this crow is trying to return the pen and that is ADORABLE AS HELL.  THEY ARE SO SMART I LOVE THEM Crows are thought to be self aware by some scientists. Its perfectly possible the crow wants to return the pen to humans. Knowing it belongs to humans. Corvids. Who KNOWS. :) Another cool crow deal: Once, when trying to assess if crows could reason and use tools, scientists had two crows who didn’t know each other each take a wire from a table (one was hooked, one was straight) and try to grab meat from a bottle with it. The crows could see each other, though they had separate bottles. Only the straight wire worked for this, so they hypothesized that if crows could reason, the second trial would have the two crows fighting over the straight wire. The second trial started and, to the surprise of the scientists, the two crows both went for the bent wire, one held it down and the other unbent it. They both got meat out of their bottles. They came to a peaceful solution without verbal communication. Crows are probably smarter than we are. they still shit all over the place and eat garbage ok but so do we
Save
America, Arguing, and Crime: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY, AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE PO0 RON PAUL TURNING POINT USA <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i> The debate over how to reform America’s health care sector often involves comparisons between the United States and other countries, and with good reason. Looking at other countries can help us learn which policies, if any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international health care system comparisons.Among the most influential are the World Health Report 2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures such as infant mortality and “mortality amenable to health care.” Generally in these studies, the United States performs poorly in comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan. Therefore, scholars often use the studies to argue for adding even more government regulations to our already highly regulated health care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or mortality from heart disease—that can be affected by many non–health care factors, including nutrition, exercise, and even crime rates. Second,they often use process measures, such as how many patients have received a pap smear or mammogram in the past three years. Process measures tell us what doctors do, but provide only an indirect measure of doctors’ productivity. Third, some of these studies inappropriately incorporate their own biases about financing in their statistics, which makes market-driven health systems appear worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies is the omission of any measure of innovation. None of the best-known studies factor in the contribution of various countries to the advances that have come to characterize the current practice of health care in the developed world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment must be invented at some point. We would be living in a different world today were it not for the remarkable genius and hard work of health care inventors in the past, as well as investments from government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. The health care issues commonly considered most important today—controlling costs and covering the uninsured— arguably should be regarded as secondary to innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must first be invented before its costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. </i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i> Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO health care rankings result from an index of health-related statistics. As with any index, it is important to consider how it was constructed, as the construction affects the results. </i><br/></p><p><i> There is good reason to account for the quality of care received by a country’s worst-off or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution and Responsiveness Distribution factors do not do that.Instead, they measure relative differences in quality, without regard to the absolute level of quality. To account for the quality of care received by the worst-off, the index could include a factor that measures health among the poor, or a health care system’s responsiveness to the poor. This would, in essence, give greater weight to the well-being of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health performance index could be constructed for poor households or members of disadvantaged minorities. These approaches would surely have problems of their own, but they would at least be focused on the absolute level of health care quality, which should be the paramount concern. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO rankings, by purporting to measure the efficacy of health care systems, implicitly take all differences in health outcomes not explained by spending or literacy and attribute them entirely to health care system performance. Nothing else, from tobacco use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other variables is simply the result of inadequacies in the data. It is difficult to get information on all relevant factors, and even more difficult to account for their expected effects on health. But some factors are deliberately excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of paternalistic assumptions about the proper role of health systems. An earlier paper laying out the WHO methodological framework asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption, diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be included in an assessment of health system performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds health systems responsible not just for treating lung cancer, but for preventing smoking in the first place; not just for treating heart disease, but for getting people to exercise and lay off the fatty foods. <br/></i></p><p><i> Second, the WHO approach fails to consider people’s willingness to trade off health against other values. Some people are happy to give up a few potential months or even years of life in exchange for the pleasures of smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports, and so on. The WHO approach, rather than taking the public’s preferences as given, deems some preferences better than others (and then praises or blames the health system for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach would take people’s health-related behavior as given, and then ask which health systems do the best job of dealing with whatever health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>
Save
Run, Tumblr, and Blog: Back to Search 7:19 PM 48% U.S. to end use of private prisons Facilities are more dangerous and less effective at providing services, government says By Matt Zapotosky August 18 at 11:30 AM The Justice Department plans to end its use of private prisons after officials concluded the facilities are both less safe and less effective at pro- viding correctional services than those run by the government. Deputy Attorney Ģeneral Sally yates <p><a href="http://amal-wa-ahlam.tumblr.com/post/149148624001/proudblackconservative-because-when-the" class="tumblr_blog">amal-wa-ahlam</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://proudblackconservative.tumblr.com/post/149148497184">proudblackconservative</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>Because when the GOVERNMENT says that a private industry is less effective, there’s never any reason to question that assessment.</p> </blockquote> <p>wait, are you trying to say that private prisons were beneficial? because if so i would like some elaboration on why you think that</p></blockquote> <p>I&rsquo;m saying that whenever the government assures me that they are more efficient at doing something than a private industry, I get mighty suspicious, considering the government is completely incapable of doing anything efficiently whatsoever. I haven&rsquo;t done enough research into private prisons to determine whether I think they&rsquo;re beneficial or not, although it wouldn&rsquo;t surprise me if they were.</p>

amal-wa-ahlam: proudblackconservative: Because when the GOVERNMENT says that a private industry is less effective, there’s never any reaso...

Save
Abc, News, and School: DAILY NATION I Wednesday August 10, 2016 ON Video games sharpen, social media dumbs Teenagers who play video games are more likely to get better grades at school, a study told News Limited yesterday has found. average in science," study co- author Albert Posso from RMIT to understand some of the principles of chemistry; evern so, they really have to under- stand science," Mr Posso told the ABC. "Some psychologists have argued that massive online player games can be beneficial to cognitive development: Teachers should consider "When you play online However, the research also games you're solving puzzles to move to the next level and that involves using some of the general knowledge and skills in maths, reading and science that you've been taught during the tablished that students who ed social media every day were receiving grades 20 points below the average in maths than incorporating popular video games into teaching so long as they are not violent Mr Posso said the link be tween excessive social media use and poor academic results could be attributed to "oppor- tunity cost" in terms of study time. ones ose who did not. The study, released by the day" said Mr Posso. "Teachers Albert Posso, study Royal Melbourne Institute of should consider incorporat co-author Technology (RMIT), says that students who play online games daily perform, especially well in ing popular video games into teaching so long as they are not violent ones." Programme for International that online gamin analyse the online habits of lem-solving skills. then compared to academic re- sults. He said the data revealed g could help young people to develop prob- "You're not really going to solve problems using (social media)," Mr Posso said Mr Posso used data from the maths, science and reading tudents who play online es almost every day score 15 points above the average in The research was published in the International Journal of Student Assessment (Pisa) to gam Communication. (Xinhua) maths and 17 points above the Australian 15-year-olds, which he "Sometimes (players) have Record Pogback'> When coach shunned him, he left and shone <p>Los videojuegos te hacen masmejor las redes sociales te atontan.</p> <p>Según un estudio del RMIT(El MIT Australiano) Tienen mejores notas en el colegio aquellos que juegan a videojuegos todos los días que los que usan redes sociales todos los días.</p>

Los videojuegos te hacen masmejor las redes sociales te atontan. Según un estudio del RMIT(El MIT Australiano) Tienen mejores notas en el c...

Save
Animals, Facebook, and News: President Obama signs a bill to dramatically reduce animal testing. Progress is being made.QSEW X İS Like 33K Today, it was my great honor to attend the presidential signing ceremony at the White House for a revision of TSCA, the Toxic Substances Control Act, with my colleague Sara Amundson from the Humane Society Legislative Fund. Today's final action upgrades a 40-year-old federal law regulating the use of chemicals, and contains for the first time in any broader environmental and health protection statute - an explicit decree from Congress to minimize animal testing and to create a clear preference for the development and use of alternative methods and strategies. OBAMA SIGNS BILL THAT WILL CURB ANIMAL TESTING ALEXA ERICKSONx JUNE 24, 2016 f Share on Facebook Share on Twitter President Obama's signing of the bill gives the Environmental Protection Agency an unmistakable mandate from Congress that it must continue to embrace 21St century science and transition away from outdated animal testing protocols, which are expensive, slow and often non-predictive of the human circumstance. I wrote recently that the EPA is dramatically decreasing animal tests for pesticide hazard assessments, and is now working to replace animal tests in its endocrine The new language in the bill will almost certainly accelerate the movement away from animal tests for chemicals, pesticides, biocides, cosmetics, and other potentially dangerous substances in risk assessment protocols or for safety substantiation. Photo by iStockphoto Breaking news: Obama sians measure to dramatically reduce animal testing screening program. In fact, in 2016, the EPA proposed to waive skin lethal dose tests for pesticide formulations <p><a href="http://babyanimalgifs.tumblr.com/" target="_blank">more baby <b>animals <i>here</i></b></a></p>

more baby animals here

Save