User talk:RobSmith/Archive 06

heh

He, like you, is afraid to engage in intellectual discourse with me publicly cause, like you, he knows he'll get his ass handed to him. Hahaha, yeah like that time you handed me ass over whether NZ was 3rd World. Oh wait.......Ace^Moderator 23:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Or the time that Rob set me straight about the University of Chicago being a public institu....oh, sorry. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 23:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Who, since WP:Phar Lap, came to the U.S. from NZ and was successful? And if the U oc C gets Pell Grants, it gets government money. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 01:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

If "getting government money" means an institution is public, does that mean that McDonnell-Douglas and General Dynamics are public institutions? You're a troll and an idiot and I'm done arguing with you. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 01:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Director Peter Jackson, Roger Donaldson and Lee Tamahori, Indy Car driver Scott Dixon, True Blood actress Anna Paquin, Actor Sam Neil, Flight of the Concords....etc etc. Though I fail to see the relevance Rob...But that's par for the course with you. Ace^Moderator 01:22, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget Russell Crowe. - π 02:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Alan MacDiarmid. - π 02:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Really? Never heard of a damn one. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 01:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Good for you buddy. But I think that I have shown your he knows he'll get his ass handed to him is bullshit. You couldn't hand someones ass to them if they cut it off and handed you a plate. Ace^Moderator 01:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to break it to you, pal, but this is what the rest of the world thinks when they think of NZ. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure they do. Ace^Moderator

How bourgeois! So money determines quality of life. OK. And you use UN stats. Of course the the UN has never been publicly audited & gets 40% of its funding from the United States (is that fair? we're only 2% of the worlds population and consume only 25 of the worlds oil and produce 25% of the worlds GDP, but we pay 40% of the UN's operating costs and then have to listen to this whining & sniveling bullshit). So lets look at people who actually know what they are talking about, the IMF, World Bank, and CIA World Fact Book. They got NZ ranked about number 25+ with about $27k per capita income; illegal immigrants in the US make more than that! When you're ready to find a real job, it's not that hard to get residency status in the US. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 04:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

UN dues

You pay 22% of the operating cost. Dumbass. - π 05:07, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

You're right, my good man. I stand corrected. And it's only because we had a GODDAMN REPUBLICAN CONGRESS THAT FIXED THAT BULLSHIT! nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:13, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

What the fuck are you talking about man, you pay based on GNI and always have? - π 05:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

hmmm, are familiar with Helms-Biden? it's a red link in WP. Perhaps you'd like to collaborate. Demanding reforms from the UN in 1996 was one of the Gingrich reforms. Sometime thereafter the UN reduced its 25% cap to 22%, but Peacekeeping operations are a large and separate budget by which the US pays an even bigger piece. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

2010-2011	$	%
UN regular budget	4,605,000,000	100
US share	1,080,000,000	22
UN Peacekeeping	7,200,000,000	100
US share	2,100.000,000	29
Combined UN budgets	11,805,000,000	100
Combined US share	3,180,000,000	27

Note: This does not include "extra budgetary" items such as IAEA, UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO, etc. etc. etc.

Rob, like Andy, reading is not your strong suit. Lets look at the criteria....The well-being of the citizens of 169 countries is calculated by the HDI, which takes into account health, income and education. So where does your comment So money determines quality of life.. Oh yeah, nowhere. Ace^Moderator 04:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Umm, perhaps from the big, white letters in the upper right hand corner of your link M-O-N-E-Y. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Ace you are arguing with a guy that comes from a state that would be a developing world shithole if it had not strapped itself on to the richer, more successful, and more liberal states of the US like California. - π 05:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

So you have confused the website subsection to be part of the article? Just goes to show the problems you have with reading comprehension. Ace^Moderator 05:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

You know nothing about marketing. Why didn't the editors of that rag put in with general news, or human interest, or tourism or some shit? why did they put nit in money? cause they now greedy evil money grubbers who worship material things and neglect spiritual values or social consciousness like you would find it there! nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

You know nothing about marketing I know a good deal about marketing, part of my professional life involves marketing (though I don't enjoy it as much as other parts of my work). But were we talking about marketing? Hmmm, you know, I don't think so. What were we talking about it?....Hmmmm... oh yeah, your completely hopelessness in reading comprehension, your inability to mount a coherent argument and about how I handed you your ass when it came to debating the development of New Zealand as a fist world country that defeats the US in nearly every category. Though to be fair the USA did beat NZ by .02 points in the 2011 index. Damn that Obama! Ace^Moderator 05:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

hmmmm, so you're in sales? Perhaps. Most wp:Sociopaths are either in jail or in sales. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Nope, not in sales. Try again big fella. Ace^Moderator 07:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Sociopaths & the financial mess

Most sociopaths go into finance these days. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 08:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

But are most people in finance sociopaths? Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 08:46, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Just the ones who matter. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, that banking crisis link is actually pretty good, although there are issues with the timeline. Did you write it? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 14:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Nah, that was someone else. You should thank them for writing it. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 19:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ One of the problems with the article is it sounds as if mortgage securitization didn't occur until after passage of the CFMA of 2000, which of course isn't true (see wp:Mortgage-backed_security#Recording_and_MERS). The RW article says, "Investment banks around the world, over-confident of market conditions then securitized much of this debt, and then repackaged groups of sub-prime accounts and sold them on again." [my bold]. That's not exactly what happened. The repeal of Glass-Steagall Act allowed regulated banks to engage in wp:Proprietary trading, and compete with unregulated hedge funds in the trading of mortgage derivatives which had been going on since the 90s. This is what caused regulated banks to get into too big to fail territory. So the article leans a little bit too much toward the now outdated, "it's Bush's fault" and compromises RW's objectivity. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 20:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Rob, I want to ask

What is your job? And did you go to college, if you did what major and if not... why? I'm genuinely curious.--il'Dictator Mikal 02:32, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

History. I wanted to teach. Both my parents were professional educators. But I've been around small business all my life, now I run several small retaliating & service enterprises. I do some business consulting and tax consulting as well. Sales have gone to shit since Obama. My sales are 25% of what they were under Bush, and my income half (that's why I have so much free time online). Other business owners give the same appraisal. In the business world it's called churning, going through the motions with no growth and little benefit for anyone involved. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Maybe if you worked a little harder instead of trolling RW you'd make a little more money. Ace^Moderator 02:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I love how you bring in politics even into questions like these. Mr. Anon (talk) 02:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

My father was the Executive Director of the Junior Achievement organization ("Educating youth on business, economics, and succeeding in a global economy") for the State of Wisconsin when I was a kid -- education & entrepreneurship is in my blood. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

What a loaded and I might say (as a 14 year old) a condescending response. Mr. Anon (talk) 03:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't directed at you, Anon. I was answering Mikalos questions. I got involved in Cold War history & politics as a kid when the US still had the draft. At the age of 12 I figured, if my destiny in life was to get drafted & killed in Vietnam, I at least wanted to know why I was gonna get killed. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 03:07, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Alright, my apologies there. Mr. Anon (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

That WP Churning article needs to be expanded. It notes "attrition rate" as being the same thing, defined elsewhere as

"A factor, normally expressed as a percentage, reflecting the degree of losses of personnel or materiel due to various causes within a specified period of time."

That best describes how small business owners view the past few years. We call it churning. It cannot be understated how important Consumer & Business Confidence indexes are. This comes from Canada just yesterday

Canadian small business confidence fell in April for the first time since last August, underscoring renewed concern about the debt crisis in Europe and high oil prices in recent months.

We're the guys who provide the food you eat, the gas you drink, the clothes you wear. We are the only hope for jobs. When business owners are pessimistic & demoralized because it just isn't worth troubling ourselves to kiss ass for no reward, others need to take note of what this means for America.

Rueters: Wed May 2, 2012 U.S. business startups rate at record low - The pace at which new businesses are created in the United States dropped to a record low in 2010, a troubling development for an economy that is struggling to achieve higher growth rates necessary to reduce high unemployment.

Ignore what any of this means at your own peril, because you mistakenly think South African & New Zealand trolls somehow got a better feel on the US domestic politics. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 04:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Or this one:

NATIONAL SURVEY SHOWS NEARLY FORTY PERCENT DROP IN TEEN CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR FINANCIAL FUTURES - A new study from Junior Achievement USA and The Allstate Foundation revealed that only 56 percent of teens 14-18 years old think they will be as financially well-off or better than their parents. That represents a 37 percent drop from 2011 (89 percent).

Sí, se puede, huh? Lucky for the wp:Communist International, 14-18 year olds don't vote. But this could effect wp:GOTV ground game this time around. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll bite. What specifically has Obama done to reduce your alleged business by 75%? You seem to think he's the cause. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 12:35, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The short answer is, no new businesses have been created that need consulting (corporate formation, accounting, tax, and compliance). See for yourself over the past 13 weeks, and that is for the entire state, not just the wp:Metropolitan Statistical Area. Usually I use InfoUSA, but it's a subscription service, and there's been virtually nothing for three years. The Census Bureau just reported New Business Start Ups (i.e., new employers) is at an all time low, down from the 1987 peak under Reagan.

Here's Job growth, Carter to Clinton. New business startups became a priority under Reagan for sustained longterm growth (i.e. future employment). It's been well established, this administration is decidedly hostile to business creation, business growth, or job creation and job growth (which is the same thing). nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 17:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll ask again. What specifically has Obama done? "Hostile to business" is just you lapping up GOP talking points. We all know the economy has been in the shitter for a few years, and while I'm not one to assert it's Bush's fault, it certainly isn't Obama's. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 17:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Business startup and job creation has been low priority, if a priority at all. Repeatedly he's expounded extortionate tax increases on the very people he needs to create jobs. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 18:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Still no specifics, eh? Alright, what hasn't he done that he should have done, specifically? And by "extortionate tax increases" I assume you mean his proposal to repeal the Bush tax cuts, which is hardly extortionate, and hasn't happened anyway, so you can't blame that for lack of job creation. That can't really explain your problem anyway, as you don't make enough to be affected by it, I'm sure. You who thinks there's no point in earning more money because you'll have to pay more taxes? No one. That's who. So I have to assume Obama is not to blame, since you can;t explain why he is. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 18:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Future expectations dictate economic activity. The psychology of consumers and investors lead them to buy or not buy at any moment. Confidence is key, or crucial to implementing any program. FDR is known for his famous "fear itself" slogan, which helped restore confidence in a frightened world. Fear in 1932 prohibited both consumers from spending, and businesses from hiring. Obama has repeatedly threatened to confiscate the capital necessary to create jobs from business investors (i.e. employers or job creators). After his re-election, he will have "greater flexibility" to allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire along with the 2% payroll taxcut, expand government further, bloat the deficit more, and encroach further on the private sector. This creates a climate of fear among employers, employees, and job seekers with an overall devastating effect on economic activity. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 18:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Just as I expected, more crap, no specifics. Do you honestly think there are people out there who want to start a business but aren't going to because in a year or two the amount the pay on their income above a few hundred thousand could go from 35% to 39.6%? Yeah, if I have to pay a couple percent more in income taxes I might as well just collect returnable bottles; it's basically the same thing. I notice the 39.6% rate didn't stifle business during the 90s, but somehow today the very mention of it is enough to shut down businesses. You don't expect me to believe that shit, do you? And how exactly does raising taxes bloat the deficit? Give me one goddamn specific thing Obama has done that has hurt your business so much. Has it occurred to you that maybe people aren't hiring you as a consultant because you suck at it? They could hire you, or they could hire someone who can string two cohesive sentences together. I know who I'd go with. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 18:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, he honestly thinks that. Personally, I think this discussion has been quite illuminating with regards to rank and file conservative antipathy towards Obama. --"Shut up, Brx." 18:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Brx, thanks, and among non-partisan independents, as well. Dick, I've legitimized and brought into full tax compliance more startup under-the-table business operations over the past 20 years than you can imagine, making upstanding taxpaying employers & employees, and contributing members of society. And yes, I understand the risks small business owners take to expand their business & hire more people. For example, when a business owner takes a cash out refinance out of his home, raiding his nest egg which would be protected in bankruptcy, cash that taxes have been paid on already, for the purpose of helping people by hiring them, then after paying higher interest carrying costs on his primary residence, has to then find a way to get his investment back out of his business, passed the corporate tax, capital gains tax, personal income tax, etc. But this is assuming he's successful after several years, in a risk he didn't need to take just to hire people.

And more than just income tax, the 179 Deduction also remains an issue. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 19:25, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

179 Deduction

Well, you're almost onto something there, as you've finally hit on something specific. But let's see what your own source says about the 179 Deduction, shall we? "During the financial crisis, the limit on the deduction was increased dramatically, to $500,000, to help small businesses and stimulate the economy. But this year, it's down to $125,000, and in 2013, it falls back to $25,000, the level where it stood in 2003." So under Obama the deduction was temporarily raised from to $500,000. Now it's scheduled to eventually go back to where it was during Bush's first few years. So the $25,000 limit under Bush was fine, but under Obama it's extortion, eh? It also says that "the Obama proposal doesn't increase the amount of money budgeted for the Small Business Administration". So now we have conservatives complaining about not enough government spending? What a strange world we live in. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

You know, we really are onto something.

So, Obama, Pelosi, and the Democrats raised the Section 179 Deduction (otherwise commonly known as a greedy evil tax cut for business) on their own to stimulate job growth. What specifically is the 179 Deduction, and how did it come about?

Do Democrats, behind closed doors, really believe cutting tax for business has a stimulative effect on jobs? If so, why all the hate rhetoric in front of the cameras? If this particular Bush Tax Cut reverts, will there be further adverse effects on growth and employment?

As to the SBA, no free market conservatives I know of support it's existence. It's no different than the Dept of Education, Fannie Mae, or Student Loans, something we'd do better without. It was created by a Democrat Congress & Democrat President in an effort to compromise some businesses as a counterweight to charges Democrats were anti-business and Kremlin stooges. It's continued existence shows the underlying popular perceptions have not changed. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 19:28, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, giving businesses tax cuts/breaks can encourage them to start/grow. We get that. However, there is a balance, which it seems the Tea party types don't get. First they're shouting "cut our taaaaaaaaxes!!!! That's what's important!!!!!!" You do that and the deficit goes up. Then they whine "Oh noes!!!! The debt. That's the most important thing!!!!!" So then you have to cut spending to counter your tax cuts, doubly so if you actually want to shrink the deficit, which then raises the unemployment rate, which gets them whining about unemployment, and suddenly that's the Most Important Thing. There's no pleasing them, so no one should bother even trying. If we went in to the great recession with a balanced budget we'd have more leeway to use fiscal policy with hopefully only modest deficits. Instead, thanks to Bush going to war with everyone we went into the crisis with an enormous deficit already. I notice most conservatives didn't seem to mind it then, but suddenly a Democrat is in office and that becomes the #1 issue (along with taxes and unemployment, which are also the #1 issue). Anyway, so it appears Obama and co. raised the 179 Deductions temporarily in an effort to pull out all the stops in getting the economy to recover, but it isn't a permanent thing because it's another revenue shortage we can ill afford. Are you seriously arguing that the reason your business dropped by 75% is because the 179 Deduction is going down to its 2003 levels? Come on. The reason your business allegedly took such a hit is because the economy has been shitty for a few years, and try as you might you can't blame that on Obama. Why most of the country seems to think the President has any meaningful control of the economy is beyond me. I think the nation needs a lesson in economy 101. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

One flaw in your narrative there is neglecting the idea that tax cuts (such as the 179 Deduction or income tax) are to spur investment for job growth (we see that here). Hence more taxpayers. Here's a typical scenario: business owner has strong equity position in a fannie mae backed principal home. Business owner has limited access to capital to expand his business by hiring people. Interests costs and lack of collateral (his home is protected in bankruptcy) make business loans prohibitive. Business owner taps equity in his home (cash out re-fi). Business owner uses his existing equity to make Section 179 purchase, being able to deduct purchase against business income the first year rather than only a portion (depreciation) over 3, 5, or 10 years (hell, he may not be in business 3 years from now and unable to recapture the equity in his home). The financing of the Section 179 deduction is done by being able to deduct the increased personal home loan mortgage.

There is a lot more to be said about 179 Deductions, but it's healthy that Obama/Pelosi Democrats are on record promoting tax cuts for business to spur jobs and growth (to use an old Reaganism) and refute New Deal tax the rich schemes like depreciation schedules. Notice the deduction stood at $25,000 in 2003. Why the fuck should the taxpayers be on the hook for the General Motors bailout, when simple adjustment to the Section 179 deduction that would allow writing off the purchase of a automobile for business use would have a huge stimulative effect? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 20:38, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

And if that auto had been made in Korea or Japan rather than Detroit? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:04, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, presumably that was the sticking point why it wasn't done. No question GM & American auto producers would have (or possibly in the future) benefited. It's unclear to me how disallowing foreign manufacturers would have impacted WTO agreements; there is a certain amount of leeway built into WTO agreements cause all nations usually have to placate some domestic protectionist sentiment, and this $500k limit was a temporary adjustment. Longterm, US auto manufactures simply have to become more competitive in the US domestic market. Allowing businesses to expense the price of a vehicle in the year of purchase may lead greater turnover and replacing business owned vehicles more often (which of course sets brings Democratic constituencies like environmentalists and labor unions into conflict, and probably is a factor limiting support). nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 21:29, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll admit I don't know much about the 179 Deduction, but your own source says that under Obama it was raised to a half million dollar maximum. That sounds pretty impressive to me. Did it have a "huge stimulative effect"? No, not really. Did it do something? Probably. It's nice you have such a keen interest in this one deduction, but you can't honestly argue that your financial predicament can be directly traced to how tax write offs for depreciated property are calculated? Turpis 3:16 (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

The scenario laid out above of the business/home owner is typical of some, much, of the consulting work I've done in recent decades; pity the poor guy who cash out re-fi'ed for $500k and his home now appraises for less than half that. He originally intended to pull the $500k back out of the business when the time was right and pay down the re-fi mortgage debt, but now faces capital gains tax on the excess over the existing home mortgage exclusion. So now he has to pay taxes on money he's already paid taxes on, largely due to events beyond his control and not mistakes or improper planning on his part. And this complied with everything legally, and still got fucked. This type of consulting work has dried up to nothing.

So I'm stuck with my retailing operations for subsistence. The cigarette tax was raised 300% by an all Democrat Congress, Democrat President, all Democrat State Legislature and Democratic Governor 3 times, which hit my retailing hard. These Democrats can talk "tax the rich" bullshit all they want, in performance it's the little guy who got fucked. Smoking is the one cheap enjoyment miserable destitute peoples have in life, and fucking communists took that away from them because they know better how the common scum proletariat ought to live their lives. $8 a pack for cigarettes does not deter someone who makes $60,000 a year from smoking; in performance, the Democrats raped the poor man, and the poor people know it. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 21:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I realize cigarette taxes affect the poor more than the rich; I'm pretty sure the point of them is not so much to be an incentive for 50 years olds to quit, but for 13 year olds not to start, which $8 a pack might do. The topic, however, is what policies of Obama's are directly responsible for your business doing poorly. I'm pretty sure the recovery isn't sluggish due to cigarette taxes, nor do I suspect there are people who are being forced to choose between a pack of smokes and hiring Joe McCarthy Jr. to consult for their business, so this, like most things you introduce into a conversation is a red herring. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 23:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Obama signed the cigarette tax his ninth day in office. So he can talk this "tax the rich" bullshit all he wants, in real performance, the only tax increase he's leveled has had a devastating impact on the poor. And it is the lack of jobs. All my businesses are dependent upon new businesses, new job creation, people working, consumers spending more, etc. In my city, the official figure is 6300 jobs lost, most from fannie mae backed residential construction. 6300 doesn't count day labor, which is huge in this part of the country. Those 6300 jobs lost were guys who then hired day laborers who did all the actual work. I estimate 10,000 day laborers gone, a diverse group of illegal immigrants, veterans, the unemployable, and others. How long will it be before new home construction picks up again so those 6300 can go back to work? Let's do the math. There 2 million repossessed foreclosed homes in the United States standing vacant and unsold. They must be resold first before demand for new residential housing picks up. In 2011, only 200,000 of these foreclosed homes were resold, even at a reduced cost. 2m/200k = 10 yrs before unsold housing inventory is reduced enough to spark demand for employment in new housing construction. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

And this is all a direct result of the cigarette tax, is it? Turpis 3:16 (talk) 02:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

No. It's Obama's negligence in the face of a jobs crisis. What created the crisis? The "share the wealth" mentality of government programs like Fannie Mae, doling out welfare payments in the form of below market, subsidized interest rates to middle calls victims of oppression. The President preaches class hate, is a Marxist revolutionary organizer, and yet himself when given the chance raised taxes on the poor, and cut taxes for the rich.

So the narrative goes, his heart is in the right place, but his head is up his ass. Bullshit. Communists are cold blooded killers. As President, not having the courage to walk away from this useless crap, and warn children not to go near, he still somehow thinks he can rehab Marx, Lenin, or Stalin. Everyday we see him preaching Marxist hate.

Not only negligence, I think he's too stupid to even see how fifty years of institutionalized Marxist programs like Fannie Mae bankrupted America, and destroyed hope. But he's not neutral on the question; it is clear where he comes from and what his program is. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

You don't actually believe any of this shit, do you? We all know you're an idiot, but come on, you're not this much of an idiot, are you? Turpis 3:16 (talk) 03:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

discussion on communism vs common sense

I just have to ask, why don't you - in the classical capitalist manner that you conservatives like to preach so much - work harder instead of bitching and moaning against the POTUS. Not that the POTUS can't do wrong, but we're in a recession. If you want your income to be higher, get a fucking job more work. Fuse with other businesses, or share certain costs with other retailers in different industries, or… use your giant super-conserva-brain to make up something else. Instead you keep posting diagrams and not doing anything to make the situation better. If anything it's not Obama's fault but people like you. --Raga Man (talk) 13:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I've been working 60-80 hours a week my entire life. Frankly, in my semi-forced retirement state, I'm enjoying the opportunity to educate young people on the Effects of Obama Employment Policies. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 18:19, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Boy do I ever feel educated, Mr. Smith. Do you have any more insights that I, as a young and naive whippersnapper, couldn't figure out without you? Cow...Hammer^time! 19:17, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

For somebody who works 60-80 hours a week, you sure have a lot of time to make terrible inaccurate comments on a wiki that dislikes you. I wonder if RationalWiki goes on your timecard, or if you just dishonestly fudge it. So much for Mr.I-Have-Done-Buisness-Stuff-Since-I-Was-A-Kid! ±KnightOfTL;DR^{critical thinking is the key to success!} 19:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Learn to read: I've been working --Raga Man (talk) 19:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Let me summarize that: Now that I feel old, I'm getting lazy and so I feel much more appreciated by rambling against a man who's problems I'm partially causing. --Raga Man (talk) 19:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Yah well, one of these days I'm gonna be slinging down mai-tai's on the beach in Ft. Lauderdale and donating the rest of my Social Security Check to the casino, while 25 year dumbfucks and community organizers like yourself only fantasize about having families and owning a home cause you need to pay for my mai-tais first. So while you struggle at your miserable low paying jobs as a dishwasher with your college degree from a state university bought with student loans, I still get paid first out of your paycheck before you are able to make a student loan payment. Best of all, while I'm sucking mai-tais on your dime, remember, I still vote Republican and abhor you commie/socialist schemes and utopia. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 21:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Rob, you taught me real conservative values: HATE EVERYBODY (PS: Not an American, neither residing in America) --Raga Man (talk) 21:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll slam down two drinks on your dime with my social security check and say a prayer for you. Here's some advice for the young: while getting married, having a family and buying a home may not interest unruly boys 24 or 25 years old, girls kinda like this kinda stuff. So if you want to impress a girl, you need to either be able to do all that, or pretend you're interested in doing that. But it's awfully difficult in today's world, even with a college education. Look at the hopes for college educated under Obama - fuck, they were better off under Bush. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 22:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok rob,. keep working til you die; or do you plan to ENJOY the benefits of a communist system?--il'Dictator Mikal 22:26, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Benefits of the communist system? Room & board and guaranteed employment in a wp:gulag? Social parasite laws? You do realize Obamacare's healthcare mandate is an extension of social parasite laws? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 22:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, once again for the old man because he forgot his glasses: Not an American, neither residing in America --Raga Man (talk) 23:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Mikalos is either a New Zealander residing in Nebraska, or a New Zealander using a Nebraska proxy server. That's who I was talking to. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 23:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

And didn't your mother teach you to be respectful to elders? do you abuse your grandmother the same way you abuse other seniors? Shame on you. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 23:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Never knew my grandparents and from what I heard, my grandmother wasn't exactly a good human being. Also: you're old, learn to have a laugh about it. --Raga Man (talk) 12:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I got the picture now. Don't be discouraged, son. Every kid is special. God created everyone for a reason. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 15:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Want me to take a picture of my birth certificate? how bout my ID? Or can you just not fathom Americans who disagree with you are American?--il'Dictator Mikal 23:45, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

There's some privacy concerns there, and even the longform birth certificate can be faked, so we'll have to find another way. Who is Who Doctor Who's daddy? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It isn't very hard to find my name if you know where to look; and you already know what state and city I live in; so what exactly would be compromised? --il'Dictator Mikal 00:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Why should I know or care about your personal information? The question is, for allegedly being a native born yank residing in the US, you have a remarkable naive misunderstanding of US politics and history. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Given I don't care much about americas history...--il'Dictator Mikal 00:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

There two types of stupidity: congenital & acquired. I'd need more information to make a proper diagnosis. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I('m STUPID for not caring much for the history of some upstart nation who thinks that helping win one war makes them the world king? --il'Dictator Mikal 00:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Let's apply some cointel to your statement, " I don't care much about americas history", possessive third person case, as if you are talking about something you are not part of. The American colloquial version of that statement would read, "I don't care much about american history", and it could be considered shameful or offensive to utter in public. That's the kind crap we hear all the time from third world ferners, and who in their right mind would trade places with a third world ferner? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I've admitted it to many people in public; i really don't care about amercas history, its boring. --il'Dictator Mikal 01:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘America's got it's share of social misfits. I'm all for sending them to New Zealand or Cuba where they'd be happy, but NZ's population would rise from 4 million to 40 million overnite, and you'd be a stranger in your own land. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 01:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

earlier upsets

Hey, Rob? Aren't you that guy I shut up a while ago that didn't know a thing about the economic context in the 1950s/1960s? You know, the guy that didn't understand that most pensions back then were on behalf of unions, not the government, thus ruining your illusory vision (supported by context-less graphs) of a no-social-support Golden Age? You know, the unions that people in the Red Scare were afraid would be disbanded and replaced with institutional slavery, prominently featured in many contemporary political cartoons and propaganda back then? ±KnightOfTL;DR^{garrulous en guerre} 00:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ In you contorted revisionism I seem to recall the website we were using mislabeled social security as "pensions", and didn't define between government worker pensions (which do not come out of social security), and the retirement relief for the rest of the proletariat. You then and now still seem to not grasp that idea, and the impact unfunded federal pensions have on overall deficits and spending. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh my. Rob is calling me a revisionist. The irony.±KnightOfTL;DR^{longissimus non legeri} 00:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Racism

Calling me a racist is a serious allegation. Please substantiate this or retract it. Ace^Moderator 23:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't me, it was a cholo!

Pretty interesting read. Hadn't seen this "excuse" before. Interesting though how an image, that totally wasn't yours, that was on a flash drive you got from someone switched titles with a commie atrocity picture you uploaded on to Conservapedia. Ace^Moderator 20:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Oh and hey, "an cholo" is slovenly English, but maybe that's some localized dialect of English off in the nether reaches removed from civilization. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 21:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

No, its a typo. An accidental grammatical error (thanks for the tip). Kinda like accidently naming your commie picture the name of your porn pics. It was "a cholo". Heh, that's awesome. Ace^Moderator 21:09, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

It was. I traded a pack of cigarettes for $12 flash drive. I only feel guilty about taking advantage of the kid. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 21:28, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

How's that morality thing of yours going rob? To good to sock up on a website that hates you but effectively stealing a flashdrive isnt?il'Dictator Mikal 21:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

So, you have the flash drive in your computer while at the same time uploading a commie picture onto CP and, somehow, the picture you upload takes on the name of the one on the flash-drive which you swapped with a Mexican for a packet of cigarettes? Sounds totally plausible. Ace^Moderator 21:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Mikalos, no one ever saw two dogs exchange one bone for another. That's what set's us apart form other animals, a propensity to truck, barter, and exchange. "Give me that which I want, and I will give you this, which you want", as Adam Smith said. It's a Win-Win situation. That's what set's the human species apart from others. Hell, even a godless evolutionist can't deny this. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 22:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

"godless evolutionist" I'm a Deist rob; not an atheist. --il'Dictator Mikal 22:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

More importantly; that isn't a win win situation; you get a flashdrive that can last for a while and has multiple uses (alongside having some porn); while he got some one use only cigs that will help kill him. --il'Dictator Mikal 22:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, you could argue the same about getting the clap from a hooker, but at the time it seemed the thing to do and neither were acting under duress.. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 22:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

you have much experience with hookers rob?--il'Dictator Mikal 22:21, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Who? in the family or on the street? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 22:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Well played, sir. This is why I look forward to hoisting a pint with you in ABQ. 00:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Amen bro. What's your libation? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 00:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

You'll have to put me on skype for this, Nuttsie. Ace^Moderator 00:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Mentor

Can you please mentor me also? Ace^Moderator 02:54, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Love to, Ace. You show promise and an ability to learn. The question is, do we want to go down a path of self destruction, or use our abilities to impress ourselves on human society in a memorable and constructive way? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I reckon the third option. Ace^Moderator 03:05, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

/I prefer my friends goal in life: Do something to register on a Geologic timescale, aka, set off yellowstone--il'Dictator Mikal 03:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Ace, the third option - being in a voluntary persistent vegetative state - is really the first option as well. At some point you need to have balls, stand up on your hind feet, and say "I am a man". But that's not enough, you still need to consider how you actions impact others. No one wants to be called an asshole behind their back or to their face. So how do we de-asshole our attitude so that it does not reflect on others? nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 03:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, Mentor! What's the first lesson? I have added a section below for you to begin....Ace^Moderator 03:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Ace's first lesson

So let's begin with the point we've established that we may be reflecting an asshole-type attitude. Not that we are assholes, but there's the danger we may become assholes. Right now we must interpret the messages and signals we are getting from others that we may be assholes. Do we want to be assholes? Only a sick fuck might, but let's assume that, at heart, we're really not, and that's why we're here.

So what type of asshole type attitudes do we knowingly or unconsciously purvey to others? Rudeness? Uncaring? Belligerency? There is a time and place for all these attributes, but let's assume uncontrolled exhibition of them to friends and strangers has sometimes, if not often, led to unpleasant results they and we regret.

Is there time for misunderstanding? Not really. I've never met the man who had the habit of making misunderstandings with others profitable. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 03:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Fascinating. Tell me more, oh wise one. Ace^Moderator 03:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Machiavelli said, "Men nearly always follow in the footsteps laid out by others", and Clausewitz said "The great mind should occupy itself with great thoughts." Overcoming your stubbornness is not a sign of weakness, rather a desire to improve yourself and your people skills count as an inherent sign of strength. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikiquote translates, "Great things alone can make a great mind, and petty things will make a petty mind unless a man rejects them as completely alien." nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 13:42, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Lesson the second

Lets go, mold me in your craven image. Ace^Moderator 12:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

There once was a kid who got smart with a policeman during a traffic stop, hauled into jail and thrown in a cell with 8 other prisoners. Some crazy fuck looked at him, and said, "What the fuck you lookin' at?", and poked his eye out.

The kid was rushed to medical attention, and shouted, "I wanna prosecute the man who did this to me!" The prosecutor said, "Fine son, give me his name." So the kid ID'd the perp. Then, after treatment, was thrown back in the holding cell with the same 8 offenders.

All 8 then jumped him, held him down, and poked out his other eyeball for being a snitch.

When his court date came up, the kid walks into the courtroom, less two eyes, and shouts, "I DEMAND JUSTICE!!" The judge responded, "Son, I assure you, you have come to the right place. Now, how do you respond to these charges against you?"

Moral of the story: It doesn't pay to have a misunderstanding with anybody. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 13:07, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmmmmmmm, what you say is deep. But what you don't say is deeper yet. Ace^Moderator 13:11, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Ace and my existences are built around purposeful misunderstanding and lies. After all, we struggled to come up with a persona so irritating and dishonest that he'd disrupt the website and ruin some people's fun. We came up with Brxbrx, which we've run with the assistance of the cabal. Ace is beyond mentoring. He needs to be imprisoned. Good thing neither of us is a real person. 14:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this is the phenomena of cp:liberal deceit. Proverbs 6:2 teaches, "Thou art snared with the words of thy mouth, thou art taken with the words of thy mouth," which is the basis of the David Harvey's wp:immanent critique. The lack of consistency destroys credibility. This is particularly true, to be successful, in the business and marketing world. People will only give you their money when they have confidence in a name brand that they are not going to be ripped off. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 15:27, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Baby boomers

Did you mean to suggest that they were going to affect this election in a meaningful way? What you were saying was mostly reasonable, but I'm still not sure what actual implications you think all of that will have. Q0 (talk) 11:03, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

No. But we could see a switch form four years ago indicating that longterm generational conflict may play out: a reversal of roles with younger voters trending more conservative, and lifelong older conservative voters trending more pro-income transfer. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:24, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The idea of young voters trending conservative sounds like wishful thinking on your part, but then again I have to admit to that same thinking in hoping that it doesn't happen. This type of thing is hard to judge, but if Obama is somehow held up as some sort of liberal icon, and the country is forced further to the right, I could see it happening. Q0 (talk) 12:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Reagan did well with young voters in the 1980s, Clinton got them back. It's probably more a question of an articulate spokesman who can appeal to them (over the next 20 years or so as generational conflict comes into play). But a 75 year old curmudgeon with conflicting views stealing the MTV Rock the Vote vote from a hipster celebrity like Obama shows it can be done. A person's background and upbringing plays a big part -- to the extent parents instill the idea of getting a good education and finding a good job, and then upon graduation feeling cheated or denied by the system. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:51, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

"A good Education" is how i became a liberal, so if conservative parents want conservative kids they may want to avoid public schools. --il'Dictator Mikal 15:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

A kid studies for 75% of their lifetime to get a diploma only to find it qualifies as a pizza delivery man. They may be receptive to a message from Ronald Reagan or Ron Paul that impingement on the free market is the root of the problem. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 15:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I consider an unregulated free market to be a problem, so no. --il'Dictator Mikal 16:28, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The suckers in question are receptive to any message saying that the root of the problem has been identified and that, if only candidate X can be voted into office, they will not have to work as pizza couriers anymore. ListenerX^TalkerX 21:37, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Well you have this fundamental underlying problem common to victims of a public school education. The teachers give a rats ass if the students are properly prepared, don't have a clue of the realities of the market place and and modern business world, if not outright hostile to it and think there something unethical about working in the private sector and not sucking the public tit like a public school teacher does. And it reflected in teachers work product -- declining test scores, and declining intelligence of Americans.

So a kid comes out of school and feels lied to: his parents and teachers didn't prepare properly. So9 he thinks Why did I go the community college to become a machinist when there are no manufacturing jobs? Then Reagan or Paul explain how communists, public school teachers, and communist unions destroyed jobs & education in America, and free choice and the free market are under attack by communists and coercive mandates. Suddenly things begin to make sense. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 20:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I have to disagree vehemently with the aspersions you cast on our teachers. Pure rhetoric with no basis in reason or reality. ħuman 02:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

PS, Reagan presided over the destruction of blue collar jobs in America, you silly person. ħuman 02:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

There are a fair number of moonbat teachers, and those who are in the classroom to grind an axe, and those who are just looking out for number one, but they tend to leave the profession within a few years.

As to right-wing politicians who use populist themes to drum up votes, they seem unable to come up with any original banter, having ripped most of their current stuff off the pinkos who blame bankers, cost-cutting pro-corporate politicians, and labor-aristocratic union bosses for the decline of U.S. jobs and education, and say that free choice and the free market are under attack by "crony-capitalists." Poor and desperate people in the 19th and 20th centuries needed little schooling, from Reds or otherwise, to be suckered by the same general routine. ListenerX^TalkerX 02:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

@ListenerX, very good comments I'm much in agreement wit.

@Human, Look at the work product -- declining test scores and loss of international competitiveness. And as for the loss of US manufacturing jobs due to declining international competitiveness, those same unionized public school teachers presided over the same loss. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 02:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Dream

I dreamed of you last night. You were a large black man with a huge head (not unlike this guy) You were sitting on a ferry listening to The BeeGees and I was plotting to kill you with an associate. Unfortunately my wife woke me and told me to get ready for work so i don't know what would have happened next. Ace^Moderator 20:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Ha Ha. I just saw that movie. Whowudthunkit? The godless humanist Steven King writes a script about a christ figure. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 17:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Dude, you haven't been paying attention. Maty of King's books - Desperation in particular and don't forget The Stand which is heavily religious in nature - have deeply religious/Christian undertones. It's a bit weird and his books suck now. After being hit by that car some years back he went a little funny in the head I think. Ace^Moderator 22:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Generally, I don't read satanic crap. So I've avoided his works. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 05:29, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

But do you listen to Satanic crap? Personally, i'm a fan of Judas Priest, but the subliminal suicide messages can get heavy-handed sometimes. Nihilist 05:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Rob, Stephen King's The Stand is a classic tale of good beating evil. In fact, it's is the Christian God beating Satan. Satanic? You idiot. Ace^Moderator 05:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Ace, I'll investigate.

Nihilist, ever since I learned the truth about Mr. Ed, I've been traumatized. I may never recover. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 18:31, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Give The Stand a read - it is a great book, one of his best. If you do make sure you are reading the complete and uncut edition. spoiler - god wins Ace^Moderator 02:46, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey. comrade

What up? Hows tricks? Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 11:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Congrates, Ace. Never underestimate the electorates ability to make the wrong decision at precisely the wrong moment. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 11:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Jah, I missed you too. Seriously though - how are ya? Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 12:11, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm fine, thanks. There is evidence of a miniscule consumer recovery, so I've been trying to salvage my business from the Obama crash. Got my fingers close to the pulse of recovery. Hey, the other day a Cuban told me he's getting money sent to him from his family in Cuba, if that's any indication of the state of the US economy. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, those commies are a wily bunch. But what they have in deceitful leftism they lack in raw masculinity. Ace is on the case.... Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 12:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Whodathunkit? Chief Justice John Roberts a closet commie. Only in America. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 12:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Chief Justice John Roberts doesn't agree with you = COMMIE! Chief Justice John Roberts votes the way you want = Conservative hero! Dude, drop your partisan bullshit. You lost, deal with it. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 12:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

So, a fascist Bush appointee agrees with leftist radicals, deal with it. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 16:34, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Is Romney a leftist radical then? Who are you going to vote for in November? DickTurpis (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Me? I'm voting for the non-Christian who represents hope. nobs^{Corporations are people, too.} 16:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Who's that? Romney? Gandhi? It isn't me is it? DickTurpis (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Holy cow

You're voting for Obama? RationalWiki must really be getting to you--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you video game?

If you do, or if you're open to trying, I suggest you look to the game Tropico 4. This is the perfect video game for you, hands down. In this game, you play as the ruler of a fictional Caribbean/Antillean island and must decide how to shape society in your demesne, all the while dealing with local political factions and foreign interests.

• The environmentalist faction wants to implement some anti-pollution regulations, but if you do, you risk angering the capitalist faction.
• The people of the island are bored, so you can build pubs and night clubs to entertain them. But beware of the resulting spikes in crime, as well the disapproval of the religious faction!
• The religious faction and intellectual faction are yet again at odds, as the first wants to organize a book burning and the second wants to legalize gay marriage.
• You can form a secret police force to quietly dispose of dissidents as well as quell the threat of attack (at the cost of personal freedoms, but only the intellectual faction cares about those, and they're usually few in number and can always be knocked off by your new secret police force).
• Be careful, if you anger either the Soviet Union or the United States, they may invade your island, resulting in a game over. To prevent this, you can either play a careful balancing act between major powers or ally with one of them, resulting in their building a military base on your island- although this greatly angers the nationalist faction!
• Another way of defending against possible invasion is to start a nuclear weapons program. But you'll need to constantly import uranium.
• Import and export various goods. You can make your tiny country the king of rum production, or export crude oil (although exporting crude can anger the Middle East).
• You can control immigration policy. Open borders means angry nationalists, but anything else risks leaving you with a serious lack of workforce.

Basically, Rob, this game lets you reenact all the things you learned about in college. All of your favorite subjects of discussion are included in this game.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:58, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

You can actually purchase Tropico 4 online right now for 7.49$! [1]--User:Brxbrx/sig 19:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I can barely set a wrist watch let alone find ringtones on a cell phone. But I am good at opening poptops on beer cans. Got that down pat. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 20:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

JCW is Andy?

Based on what? Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 21:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, was that you? I thought you were me. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

So, in other words. you made that up, too. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 22:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

It remains classified, sources and methods, you know. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 22:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Sauces and meth? I'm there. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 23:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

JCW - Jesus Christ Worshipper? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 23:26, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I was talking directly to Karajou there.

If you wanna talk to Karajou using terms like 'ragtops' do it somewhere else. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 01:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. My apologies, sire. Just trying some radical therapy on Karajou. Evidently there's been progess in the Ken case, so bumblingly figured it was worth the try. I will continue to pray for both you & Karajou, and ask God's forgiveness for being misunderstood. Jesus ought to be sympathetic to me, a miserable sinner, he was misunderstood, too. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Take your petty squabbles with your former sysop buddies somewhere else. We don't care about your problems. Email him. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 02:14, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I think he's got me on the spam email list. Perhaps you could conduct a private meditation? nobs^{Corporations are people, too}

Well that's just tough luck. No one gives a fuck about your personal problems, least of all me. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 02:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Damn, Ace, I've been praying for your liver for months only cause you whine and bitch about your personal problems here. Remember what Jesus said, what goes around comes around. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OK. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 02:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Rob, you're wrong again.

Unsurprisingly really, with you been both woefully undereducated and fundamentally stupid. While you "trollingly" argued that we should "end the mobocracy and impose rules..." I have been arguing that we should DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE. So I haven't taken one of your ideas at all. When I made this edit. I was acknowledging what has happened not arguing for a particular position. Dummy. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. Actually I never stated the codification was a position you advocated or support, only that my initial proposal has now become law. Your actions show a limited amount of balanced thinking and an ability to tolerate a community consensus at odds with your own agenda. Speaking for the majority, we appreciate your help in cleaning up the Community Standards page. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 18:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Rob you are a total clueless idiot. Everyone except you can clearly see what your paranoid mind cannot seem to comprehend. And still you accuse people of being socks of people they have nothing to do with, while you don't see what's right in front of your face. Don't add wrong info about me again, and keep your paranoid fantasies to yourself. So long, and thanks for all the fish. Refugee^{talk page} 05:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Ha.. I always wanted to use that line from Hitchhikers Guide "So long.. and thanks for all the fish" it's the last words James Hong posted at HotOrNot many years ago. Oh, and just in case you still can't figure it out: Refugee and alter ego. Refugee^{talk page} 06:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Rob, you're wrong again. And again.

Jesus Christ, Smith, you are a stupid man. Did you not read the post directly above yours, where I said I was JOKING? That means that there is no relationship between what I wrote and any notion of the truth or any opinions I might hold. BECAUSE I WAS JOKING. Fuck, you ARE a big dummy.Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 03:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Troll is troll is stupid. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 03:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Could repeatedly feeding a troll qualify as trolling? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:05, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll concede an error. When ToP referred to his friend FB, I thought it meant user Foulhmouthed Bastard. It takes time to unlearn CP Sysop-think. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 18:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

They say you...blade runner "vile hate-monger", please make the case for yourself

There are folks looking to banninating you completely from here.

I, for one, hope that does not happen.

They got rid of MC they'll get rid of you, too.

Then everything will be fine...until someone else gets labeled and ganged-up upon.

C®ackeЯ 07:08, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I for one don't want to see Rob banned, sometimes he needs a notch taken out though. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 07:35, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't want Rob permanently banned, but he needs a time out. I actually was rooting for Rob before he got disinvited from editing on CP. I tolerated his views and actions even though they conflicted significantly with mine. And then he opened his fat mouth here with no respect for fellow editors, some of whom have friends who were in the theatre at the time the gunfire began. Rob needs a few days' timeout without his mop to unblock himself. He needs to be put in a corner so he can think about what he's doing. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 07:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

He hasn't edited for 17 hours. Jesus H(ussein?) Christ on a stick please obtain a thicker skin and SOME perspective! 08:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC) C®ackeЯ

He spent a decent chunk of that time blocked without sysop to unblock himself. I'm also not the one fucking with his user rights or blocks. He also deleted a chunk of WIGO:CP Talk, including me calling him out on his Godwin... replacing it with a raw URL to editing the page, for some reason. Don't actually know what was going through his head there, but it was reverted on the spot anyway so it's hardly a big deal. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 08:36, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Godwin, huh? even when the post says high unemployment led to the election of Hitler and could led to the election of Romney. Did you read the context? do you lack comprehensions skills are or seriously that much of a mindless bigot? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 11:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Dummy.

I'm still waiting for a citation on Holmes having a Master's degree. I'm still waiting on a citation on the claim that he was frustrated at his prolonged unemployment. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 16:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Chicken Coop

Since apparently people want to promote and ban you forever and ever because they don't like you, I've opened up a proper community vote on the Chicken Coop to settle the matter and I wanted to make sure you were aware. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 10¹³ points 10:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

As an update: you are neither blocked nor promoted. Please don't interpret this as an endorsement of what you said or your general attitude; you remain unbanned and a sysop for ideological reasons (RW values free speech). I would strongly urge you to consider toning it down when it comes to such sensitive issues. Thank you for enduring the process in a calm and reasonable manner, as you have.--^talk 05:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Will do. looking forward to observing Community Standards discussions. Oh, and Thank you, Jesus! nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 01:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

" I just refuse to tow the party line..."

It's "toe" the line, dummy. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 21:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Dummy, Redux.

I'm still waiting for a citation on Holmes having a Master's degree. I'm still waiting on a citation on the claim that he was frustrated at his prolonged unemployment. Chop, chop. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 22:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I"m the one who claimed he had a phd. and he didn't. he was working on it. he dropped out after one year, anyhow. but again, it's all about "wait and see" and not assuming anything other than someone very sick (in the 'normal people don't do that' way) killed 12 people. I was and still am pissed at everyoen who claims they knwo what and why. --GodotWhat is your fucking defense of automatic guns, again? 23:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

You claimed he had a Ph.D., and admitted you were mistaken when you learned you were mistaken. Because you are a grown-up. After that, Robbo claimed he had a Master's. I'm still waiting for documentation on that fact. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Here's the original posting citing the LA Times about being unable to find work after he graduated in 2010 (which would be two years ago). Here's Greta Van Susternen's site which states it was a Masters Degree (Greta's on vacation, so Abby Sears is covering for her). nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 23:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, thank you, Rob. I call bullshit, though. He got the B.Sc. in 2010. He dropped out of the Ph.D. in 2012. No room in there for an M.Sc. And the article says "Tom Mai said the mother told him Holmes couldn’t find a job after earning a master’s degree from a public university in California..." is a pretty weak hearsay reference. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Well good. You stand with Andy Schlafly then calling bullshit on mainstream media sources. Incidentally, this revert here by Dick Turpis occurred when I had a browser crash trying to answer your question and all that got posted was the submission link to the same page I was posting to. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 23:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

That's right, Rob. I am just like Andy Schlafly because I can recognize questionable reporting when I see it. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 00:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Here is what the timeline had to be for your scenario to work: June 2010. Graduate from the B.Sc. September 2010. Start the M.Sc. June 2011. Finish the M.Sc. September 2011 June 2011. Start the Ph.D. June 2012. Quit the Ph.D. June-July 2012. Be unemployed and frustrated for an extended period of time. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not my timeline, it's what the LA Times reported. His neighbors, who rarely spoke to him, said he could not find work after graduating in 2010. One can conclude then, they had at least this knowledge of their reclusive neighbor. Other news reports say he worked in a temporary or seasonal position as a low paid summer camp counselor. One thing is for sure, he did not find work for the position he was qualified for. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 23:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

This is why you need to learn some critical reading skills. Especially where the LA Times is concerned, I see a pattern there. Count the years/semesters, and you'll see that there's no time for prolonged unemployment in his life. He might not have gotten a great job with the B.Sc., but he did get into a doctoral program with it, so unemployment could not have been a long-running issue for him. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 00:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

He evidently tried to find work with his Bachelors Degree two years ago, and has not been employed since for the job he studied and was qualified for. That is what the LA Times says. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 00:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

He DID FIND WORK. He was employed full-time as a Ph.D. student and had been since June 2011, more than a year ago. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 00:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Jesus H. Christ. Now I am going to lay out for you the scientific method by which United States Department of Labor calculates the Unemployment Rate. The occupation of Ph. D student is not counted in labor force statistics. Based upon his age, education, and no known limiting factors such as disability, he is counted an eligible adult in the workforce eligibility index. It is the Workforce Eligibility index from which the Unemployment Rate is derived. Being an eligible adult, without a paying job subject to payroll taxes, makes him unemployed by United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics methodology. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 00:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Really Rob? So the what, 7 or 8 % unemployment rate includes all full-time students? Also, while I am not saying this is definitely so in this particular case, in all likelihood, if he was a full-time student in a Ph.D. program, he had " a paying job subject to payroll taxes," probably as a TA or an RA. Remember that from when you went to grad school? Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 00:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Interesting theory, of course you admit its PIDOOMA. If he were a TA we would probably have seen interviews and comments from former students. It is noteworthy however, all mainstream media reports refer to his unemployment, and underemployment, and none even vaguely suggest what you've imagined.

Now it is possible for someone to work and be paid "under the table", the burgeoning black market in the U.S., but no reports allude to that. Outside of agriculture employment where different Labor Department rules are applied, there is no reason to suspect or believe that James Holmes was any other than long term unemployed since failing to secure work in the field he was trained for. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 01:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, I'm not willing to say for sure he was employed as a TA, or, given the fact he was in a hard sciences program, more likely an RA, but I would be pretty surprised if he wasn't. Most grad students at big schools are, or they're on a stipend of some sort-weren't you? Now explain to me how all students are counted as "unemployed" in the official stats and how the unemployment rate is only 7. whatever percent. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 01:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey guess what, Rob. "He was currently collecting unemployment, a federal law enforcement official said.". Do you know what you have to have before you can collect unemployment? A job. And for more than a week or two. If he was currently collecting unemployment, and graduated from college in 2010, and was in the Ph.D. program since 2011, he must have been working somewhere legit over the last year or so. Since no other job has come to light, I'd say probably as a lab monkey at UC, until I hear otherwise. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 01:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

He worked as a camp counselor. 13 weeks (1 Q) are required to collect benefits. Camp counselor is seasonal consisting of one quarter (June, July, August). This presumably could have been the position. Benefits are half the average weekly pay. So if a camp counselor made minimum wage, $7.25 per hour @ 40 hours = $290 per week/2 = $145 per week UC benefits. Big bucks for a neuroscientist. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:07, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

No Rob, he worked in a paid position in the university's neuroscience research program. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, I wouldn't call a guy with just a Bachelor's a "neuroscientist." Not 'till he can put a "Dr." in front of his name. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Now tell me again how students count as unemployed. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 01:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Dummy: "It is not immediately clear if Holmes, who also worked in a paid position in the university's neuroscience research program, was still employed there after withdrawing from the program." HE HAD A JOB. IN HIS FIELD. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 01:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. (I've lost about 4 postings now in ec's) So, he has experienced unemployment since 2010, and, according to CNN, it is not immediately clear as of this moment whether or not he was employed at the time of the shooting. OK. Progress made. An aside, recently and emergency room doctor in Santa Fe ran a red light while under the influence of alcohol and killed a 4 year old girl. Of course, at the time she ran the red light she was an emergency room doctor at a very respected hospital. By the time the news was reported some 6 to 10 hours later, she was "a former emergency room doctor." nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 01:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Progress made, indeed. He had secured paying work in his field while pursuing an advanced degree in said chosen field and if he was was unemployed it was for no more than a matter of weeks at most, so the likelihood of him experiencing stress over long-term unemployment is minimal at best. Yes. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 01:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I'm still waiting to hear about how students are counted as part of the unemployed rate if unemployment is less than 8%. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

if he was was unemployed it was for no more than a matter of weeks at most

No, he collected benefits for a number of weeks over the past two years. Being unemployed, and collecting benefits are two entirely different things.

No conclusions can be made about the research position, as there may be evidence he lost that job.

The position of student is not considered occupational employment, and students can be considered workforce eligible. A student qualifying for a work/study grant is considered, and must be, workforce eligible. And there's no reason to disqualify other students from workforce eligibility simply because they hold the non-paying occupation of student. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

"as there may be evidence he lost that job." When he left the program. IN JUNE. It's now July. That means weeks ago. And see below for how students are decidedly not work-force eligible. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Decidedly no.

• A student is not work force eligible if a student is not working and not looking for work.
• A student is work force eligible if they are not working but have actively looked for work over the past 4 weeks, hence counted in the Unemployment Rate.

All this however, is more of an argument for less government and de-regulation, of course. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you know what I would not be worried about if I had my tuition paid and a $26,000 stipend?

Unemployment. Dummy. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I just found it, too. niversity of Colorado officials disclosed Monday that mass shooting suspect James Holmes was being paid $26,000 a year for his studies, money that could have financed the cache of firearms, ammunition and explosive devices found in his apartment.
(I'm working with a very unstable connection here, so I may have to relocate or just continue in the A.M). nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Wherever you're going with this, I don't care. Dude had a prestigious grant and the chance to get a Ph.D. from a top-ranked school in his field. Unemployment was not an issue for him. End of argument. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't even know why you bothered to go this far ToP, he's an idiot. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 02:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't either. It's like having a big bag of crack on my desk. As much as I know that I feel all headache-y and dirty afterwards, I just can't stop myself. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The "connection" Rob is complaining about would seem to me to be that tentative connection he has to reality. Perhaps he could use a rest? C®ackeЯ 02:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Students and the unemployment rate.

So if roughly, what, 3.5% of the people we count as "unemployed" by your count are going to school full time, then "real" unemployment--i.e. people who are actively looking for work because they need it to support themselves and their families would be somewhere south of 4% or so, right? Or maybe, just maybe, students aren't counted in the labor force, dummy. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 02:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Again, that is a false dichotomy. (A) James Holmes was a Ph.D student in the labor force. (B) Millions of students are in the labor force. (C) Being a student does not preclude being in the labor force. (D) As noted when this discussion started, it is the Workforce Eligibility index that determines unemployment, not the Labor Force. (E) Other factors determine if a student is an eligible worker, such as the students own actions, not his status as a student. See here, for example. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and just to belabor clarifying the point, as I said above (00:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)),

The occupation of Ph. D student is not counted in labor force statistics. 03:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Once again, there are not enough facts out to assert anything about Holmes and his job situation. The "he was on unemployment" is unconfirmed, it is also without context. That he is a "phd student looking for a job" or "in the job market" is your assumption. not one single thing confirms or disconfirms that yet. Would you please fucking stop pretending to know shit about a mass murderer, just to play troll? GodotWhat is your fucking defense of automatic guns, again? 04:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

This current discussion has little to do with Holmes. Read above how ToP says over and over again and again how to be a student is to have an occupation; then voila, he discovers a the start of this new thread that the occupation of student is not counted in the labor force. Now, who is trolling who? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 04:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I concede the point about students being considered part of the working force. That is not the case in the country where I come from. But it seems from the link that you provided that not all students who don't have jobs count as "unemployed," and, more to the point, I think it's clear that a guy going to school full time with a $26k stipend, full tuition, and a job in the lab was certainly not "unemployed" in any meaningful sense of the word, and therefore, the more important point that you were trying to make--that "unemployment" drove him to commit the crime, is simply untenable. Dummy. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 04:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. That was gracious. But I didn't use more than just the LA Times report, so I can hardly be accused of Original Research, and between my browser problems and the rest of this shit, more than 24 hours passed before either one of us learned of the research position. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 04:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

"To digress, it's my gut feeling that the President's stance on Student Loans my (sic) suffer somewhat as a result of the news of Holmes $26,000 grant, but let's just not go there at his time, ok?" That reminds me of the "Having said that" joke from "Curb Your Enthusiasm". You're an idiot Rob. I don't have the numbers in from of me, but let's be generous and say that only a few hundred thousand people are collecting extended unemployment benefits. Why haven't they opened fire on a crowd? Is it because they're not mentally-ill in the way James Holmes is mentally ill? Why is someone who couldn't find a job but received a prestigious grant MORE distraught than someone who can't find a job and can't feed their family? Idiot. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 04:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ (Thanks, Cracker. That was helpful) We isolated and established some facts. One is, Holmes was frustrated in 2010 (according to neighbors) for not being able to find a job based upon his education and training. Two, Holmes returned to school and received grants & aid, which while they temporarily helped his living and educational expenses, is not a full time career and position. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 04:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

We isolated and established some facts. Not one of which is shown to have any bearing whatsoever on the incident in question. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

So, are you still arguing that he did this because he couldn't find a job and not because he was simply a very ill person? Hiphopopotamus (talk) 04:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Challenge

After your recent failed coup attempt and trolling the coop, would you now be of a mind to actually debate someone who holds views differing to your own? I believe a case can be made that your attempts to liquidate me run contrary to the RationalWiki Mission Statement, and amount to an effort to promote junk science. Care to have an honest, free flowing, open discussion here or on my user page? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 16:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

"an effort to promote junk science." and with that comment you lose. Fuck off Rob. You are clearly not well. Go and dance on some more graves. PsyGremlin^Prata! 19:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

"dance on graves", huh? that bit of hyperbole motivated this challenge. Do you stand ready to refute this junk science, published in Sociological Focus in 1984, claiming extended unemployment caused the deaths of 949 additional suicide victims, cause as you certainly well know duration of unemployment in the U.S. is at an all time high. Is the 1984 Sociological Focus article junk science, or would using the same methodologies today -- with the higher duration -- amount to junk science, as well? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

(Whereupon User:PsyGremlin vandalized the discussion).

Fiat v. gold standard

What is your take?--Colonel Sanders (talk) 03:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Gold Standard is impractical. I've studied it for years now, and once was a goldbug myself during the inflation wracked 1970s (Congressman Ron Paul even wrote back to me in 1982 1978 on the subject; the letter probably survives in the Ron Paul Papers somewhere). Deflation is a serious problem we should all be concerned about, although most living Americans have little or no experience ever dealing with it. Excessive monetary inflation, as mush as I hate it, is still preferable to a collapsing money supply. And what is missing from these discussions is still how a single, large, rich nation, on the gold standard, would interact with its trading partners and the IMF. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I would agree there. The U.S. would have to steal all the gold in the world to pay off its national debt per the gold standard. Goldbugs such as Judge Napolitano insist that if currency is backed not by some precious commodity, that the government shall be able to print its way to oblivion. --Colonel Sanders (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

A fiat system does open the door for abuse which can only be checked by responsible citizenship. But one needn't put 100% of their net worth in precious metals as an inflation hedge. 5% in silver is plenty, and 10% for the most paranoid. Gold could factor in as well dependent on the Gold/Silver ratio. One must learn to read the buy silver sell gold, or buy gold sell silver signals. And the beauty of it all is, it's still a matter of individual choice. Those who are most trusting in the benevolence of government don't have to do anything, and can allow their faith to lead them. That's the beauty of individual freedom and personal choice. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. However, I don't think Ben Bernanke counts as "responsible citizenship". It takes a keen investor to know when and how to invest in gold and silver. I thought about diversifying my portfolio myself with about 5-6% gold/silver. And, yes, individual choice is one of the beautiful things about the American experience. However, of course, that choice was eschewed when owning gold was illegal during the F.D. Roosevelt Administration per The Roosevelt Gold Confiscation Order Of April 3 1933. --Bona fide Taylor Swift lover, according to Conservapedia admins! (talk) 23:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

By responsible citizenship I'm talking about the individual choice of voting for a Congressperson who promises pie-in-the-sky bullshit to benefit your own selfish interests vs a candidate dedicated to serving the commonweal. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Barbecue

the word barbecue is of french origin. there, now you'll never enjoy one again. Sophie^Wilder 21:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Now, now. I'm French and Rob doesn't mind me. Also, Sophie, that crack Rob made at the Saloon was a joke.--"Shut up, Brx." 02:05, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Fuck off Brx. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

The veracity of French origins is in question; most people believe Bar B.Q. came from the branding iron of a Texas rancher (of English origins). But anyway, this uniquely American contribution "made human civilization possible", sources say. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Umm, actually barbecue is of Carribean origin. Aceⁱ⁹ 20:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Here's where your lack of understating of American culture and history betrays you. No way did Texas rednecks adopt the language, culture, or habits of the French catholic Caribbean. At least that's what they will say. The idea Bar B.Q. is of French/Caribbean origin is modern day historical revisionism to corrupt the minds of children and indoctrinate them with multiculturalism, political correctness, identity politics, and communist propaganda. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 22:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Fucking mutant. Aceⁱ⁹ 23:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

The more important question is whether third world countries prefer gas or charcoal grills. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:05, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Charcoal. If it isn't charcoal it is just an oven but outside. Aceⁱ⁹ 00:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

That's exactly what I told my dad when he wanted a gas grill. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Don't you guys use peet moss or compost made of sheep dung? What does that add to the mesquite taste? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 02:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

No, we use charcoal. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

<Gives the secret handshake> "Jah-Bul-On". Hey, did you know Mozart's Zauberflote gives away all the Masonic mysteries? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 04:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

fucking mutant. Aceⁱ⁹ 04:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

You are still among the profane, my man. I'd offer my services as a spirit guide, but I'm all booked up for the next few months. In the meantime, you could begin reading the City of God before we get you to work building the City of Man (Babylon). nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 20:51, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Wrong City of God m'man. Aceⁱ⁹ 22:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm speechless, Ace. You got me on that one. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 01:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Go back to Ameriwiki, please

Knock some sense into those bullshit usurpers and Taylor Swift lovers. They're so ignorant it's laughable. --Elvis is King (talk) 00:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly support this idea in every shape and form! --Mikal ^{Harass Follow} 00:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I got a few pieces I'm working on, Liberal bowel syndrome, for example. But it needs de-hatcheting and cleanup. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 00:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Please, Rob? They're utterly insane! --Elvis is King (talk) 00:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Forbes Magazine

Ranked this horrible backwater of inbreds we call NZ No. 3 in a list of Best Places on Earth to Run a Business and no. 1 place to start a business.
The US didn't make the cut I am afraid. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

After four years of Obamunism it's not surprising. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Rob, having a conversation with you is like playing the straight man in the improv game "two line vocabulary." We can say whatever we want, but we know your only reply is going to be "It's Obama's Fault" or "Look! Communists!" Oh yeah, Kara says hello and she misses you. SirChuckB^{That is all} 22:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's the rewrite for mainspace intro:

“”Pop art luminary Andy Warhol once remarked that everyone is famous for 15 minutes, and Barack Hussein Obama was no exception...."

nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 23:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Fancy a wager?

Let's make the election more interesting. Obama wins, you take a promotion and a one-year, no-talk-page block. Romney wins, I do the same. I'll even give you a 10-point spread. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 00:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry ToP but you are not empowered to unilaterally make decisions for the site. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 08:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I rephrase: R-Money wins, I promote myself, block myself for a year, no socks, no talk page; Hussein Obama wins, Rob does the same. None of the site's business if someone LANCB's as part of a bet. Whaddaya say, Rob? Are you feeling that confident? I'll even give you five more points in the EC. (Last chance to accept the bet is November 6, 7 AM EST) Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 13:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

bububuttt...here's where you & I differ...my personal feelings are that opposition voices are crucial to a democracy. My objective has never been to silence dissenters (other than with rational argument). I'd feel oppressive, and have a guilty conscience, if I accepted your wager, such as proposed. But am not inamenable (if there is such a word) to some modified form. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 18:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

say for example...the loser STFU during the transition til inauguration day... nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 18:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright -- If Obama wins (with more than 285 electoral votes) you are forbidden from posting from the moment Romney concedes until Obama says "So help me Allah Frank Davis God." If Romney wins at all, I will not post from Obama's concession until Romney says "So help me Elohim on Kolob. It's a good thing I wearing my magic undies, 'cause it's cold today." Deal? Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 19:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

In principle...howabout allowing a Parthian shot after whomever does the concession speech (say within a reasonable timeframe) until Justice Roberts fucks up the swearing in ceremony again. But realize, this silences dissent on the breathtaking fiscal-cliff fiasco which is about to destroy life on this planet as we know it, and can only be resolved with bipartisan cooperation. My thinking primarily is to reserve comment on new appointments and policy proposals; but I'll sincerely miss your invaluable input on avoiding the fiscal cliff.... nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:25, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

It's a bet. I can live with the consequences. I shall ask Ace to police both of our behaviours. Good luck. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 02:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

okie dokie. 'Membra, it could be upto Nov. 17 b4 we here a concessionaire spreech. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

This sounds fun. Aceⁱ⁹ 19:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I wish ToP would've read Samuelson yesterday before he decided to bow out of such important upcoming discussions. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

290, Baby.

See you in January. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 04:47, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll be enforcing this. See ya later, smith. Aceⁱ⁹ 20:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Soooo....now we arrive at the fiscal cliff. Three possible scenarios:

• Debt ceiling deal expires without a vote and shit hits the fan (including more jobloss);
• Temporary bandaid applied til Spring break (possible, but unlikely);
• Obama compromises with Ryan proposal to make permanent the 2 percent payroll tax cut by allowing workers to manage their own retirement accounts with, essentially a step toward privatization of Social Security. This limits the growth of National debt and reduces the deficit. Best case scenario.

In parting let me just thank Ken DeMyer, Brian MacDonald and Andy Schlafly who are in part responsible for this fiasco. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I shouldn't ask this, because I don't think you're allowed to reply, but are you suggesting that Conservapedia in any way played a role in Obama's victory? Even you can't be that delusional, can you? DickTurpis (talk) 21:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Please don't, Dick. He is trying to weasel out of his bet by making an asinine statement. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Sterile for mod

Sterile.

Ahh. I see that you're blocked because of your wager with Ace. Let me know if you want to vote in the election and I'll unblock you. I have no idea why you're staying blocked in the first place, but have fun you rascal. 22:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Robby, where I'm from, a man who welches on a bet gets cut.

Check yourself, son. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 04:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)