VAX or FIRED

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
You believe that correlation? Of a few hundred people in Kentucky? No control, no data set. Based on reporting, but not stating how data was gathered nor protocols for getting the data without bias? You are aware that reporting and medical coding has been manipulated since the beginning. Even encouraged to get hospitals more reimbursements.Openly. Meaning false equivalents and assumptions from biased data. This is an anecdotal report from August it isnt a study by any stretch of science. P value is what? I missed it. Can you tell me where it is stated?
Interesting set of mind numbing minutia intended to seed doubt without actually saying anything. Also, you use the word correlation in a way that shows you don't understand the meaning of the word.

Regarding who I believe? Not you of course.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
This is what I googled quickly, who knows how accurate it is,

“90% of Democrats had been vaccinated, compared with 68% of Independents and just 58% of Republicans.”

so that’s a lot of republicans that are vaccinated. Then you have to wonder how many of those who are not live on farms or places where there is Very little risk. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I felt like shit after my shots,worst after the booster. I swear to go’s it caused a shingles flare-up. So I can imagine a situation where it may not make sense to somebody. But still, they got to go into town for supplies sometime, so it might make sense to them, but still better to get it. No deaths yet right? Amazing, I would have expected a few hundred by now.
 

HGCC

Well-Known Member
I’m not so sure about it being one party. Historically what do we have? A little over 50% of the people actual vote? Every Republican I know is vaccinated. I would agree that a higher percentage of republicans are not vaccinated compared to democrats, but there are plenty of stupid people everywhere.
I dont know man, it's become sort of a political football or whatever you want to call it. Being against the vaccine is really only acceptable within one party now. Same party that had leaned in on pretend issues like CRT and that the election was stolen. That said, and man I sure hope I am right, its a very loud minority within that side. I do describe it as trumpism rather than the republican party, but it has really taken over, or at least seems that way.

Sure...people don't vote, but well, they then become irrelevant to the conversation and aren't part of the equation. I do think the non voters probably fall about equal on both sides, so don't really adjust weightings in my thought process. You do have 50-70 percent of the registered Republicans that believe the election was stolen. It's been shifting, but again, nearly half the party opposed the vaccine. It's a very large percentage of that defined group that have beliefs based in nonsense. They happen to also be in the driver's seat of the party at the moment. More traditional Republicans have been getting pushed out for quite a few years as RINOs. They seem to have filtered over to the dems, that party has marched steadily to the right for a long time now.

I'm anxiously awaiting hearing about how trickle down is some super progressive economic theory in a few years.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Youre not spelling incorrectly so you're not drunk? Must just be born stupid. Because what I type is misconstrued by your subpar comprehension. Ive never said hospitals are doing anything to results.
Shrink your amygdala bud, would help you out.
Hey snoop.

What does correlation mean and why was it used incorrectly in your earlier post? I ask to test whether or not you are a bot or just a dumb asshole.
 
Last edited:

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Yeah, it is what it is. There are very valid criticisms that you can make on any topic under the sun, those can't be made as the pipeline is clogged with demon sperm and claims of treason for eating Dijon mustard.
I prefer demon mustard and Dijon sperm.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
Yeah, half is a lot. Plus, I think the policies of the republicans going back 40 50 years are kind of dumb, so I expect more dumb people to align with them. Country needs a good party that truly is for small fiscal spending and small government, republicans are no longer that, haven’t been in so long.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Yeah, half is a lot. Plus, I think the policies of the republicans going back 40 50 years are kind of dumb, so I expect more dumb people to align with them. Country needs a good party that truly is for small fiscal spending and small government, republicans are no longer that, haven’t been in so long.
No. Small government is an idea whose time is past.
 

HGCC

Well-Known Member
I think the changes in the composition of main beliefs of the parties is pretty interesting.

Obama was really interesting to me in that regard. I was sitting there like "so...ending that middle east war endeavor now right??..." oh...so now we are cheering how many people our team is droning...wtf. immigration was also odd like that, dems cheered on kicking illegals out. "Look how tough on terrorism and illegal immigration we are compared to W."

I thought both sides liked cheap labor and war, just saying.

Edit: I thought Obama was going to be far left, masquerading as a centrist to get elected. Not so much.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
No. Small government is an idea whose time is past.
I’m not sure about that to be honest. If I had to bet on it I would, but at the same time there is so much waste in government. Take covid for example. So much wealth given to the rich. You have Tom Brady getting millions etc. simply as a counter argument it’s important.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
I’m not sure about that to be honest. If I had to bet on it I would, but at the same time there is so much waste in government. Take covid for example. So much wealth given to the rich. You have Tom Brady getting millions etc. simply as a counter argument it’s important.
Small government is an idea that died with the collapse of ‘29. There is no way a large nation with a small or heavily federalized government can compete internationally. This is where (the US version of) libertarians always fail. Their vision would leave our nation dead meat against the figurative coyotes and buzzards looking for conquest.

Describe to me how a small government can deliver on e. g. Social Security. That man was planning to dismantle the second most important task of government! Goodness knows corporate pensions for the 99% who do not receive stock options have shrunk over the last 40 years.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
I think the changes in the composition of main beliefs of the parties is pretty interesting.

Obama was really interesting to me in that regard. I was sitting there like "so...ending that middle east war endeavor now right??..." oh...so now we are cheering how many people our team is droning...wtf. immigration was also odd like that, dems cheered on kicking illegals out. "Look how tough on terrorism and illegal immigration we are compared to W."

I thought both sides liked cheap labor and war, just saying.

Edit: I thought Obama was going to be far left, masquerading as a centrist to get elected. Not so much.
Status quo. Both sides are bought and paid. Term limits, super-pacs etc, till you deal with the cause of the problems I don’t know why people expect anything else. Live long enough and you keep seeing the same nonsense repeated as well. The people have always got the bare minimal. Minimal wage is what? $7.25? Till that is raised to $18 and companies are told to deal, you know they are sucking somebody’s pole.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
Small government is an idea that died with the collapse of ‘29. There is no way a large nation with a small or heavily federalized government can compete internationally. This is where (the US version of) libertarians always fail. Their vision would leave our nation dead meat against the figurative coyotes and buzzards looking for conquest.

Describe to me how a small government can deliver on e. g. Social Security. That man was planning to dismantle the second most important task of government! Goodness knows corporate pensions for the 99% who do not receive stock options have shrunk over the last 40 years.
As a whole it cannot, but there is room for branches to be smaller and that is why I say the argument is important. Governments thirst for money knows no ends because there is some rich mofo who depends on bringing home the bacon for their state and industry.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
As a whole it cannot, but there is room for branches to be smaller and that is why I say the argument is important. Governments thirst for money knows no ends because there is some rich mofo who depends on bringing home the bacon for their state and industry.
Select the branches you’d cripple and by how much, and to what expected effect. We are very badly undergoverned right now. Enough government and that man would have done far less damage.
 

HGCC

Well-Known Member
Status quo. Both sides are bought and paid. Term limits, super-pacs etc, till you deal with the cause of the problems I don’t know why people expect anything else. Live long enough and you keep seeing the same nonsense repeated as well. The people have always got the bare minimal. Minimal wage is what? $7.25? Till that is raised to $18 and companies are told to deal, you know they are sucking somebody’s pole.
Some podcast I was listening to made the point that abolishing inherited wealth would be one of the greatest societal goods we can do, basically wealth will do what is necessary to perpetuate itself and reforms can't occur until that power is destroyed. The majority of the countries maladies stem from that issue.

It was a good and interesting argument, a fairly simple step to resolve a bunch of issues. Good luck getting that to pass, and my goal is to set my kid up, so meh, but still was a good point.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
I think the changes in the composition of main beliefs of the parties is pretty interesting.

Obama was really interesting to me in that regard. I was sitting there like "so...ending that middle east war endeavor now right??..." oh...so now we are cheering how many people our team is droning...wtf. immigration was also odd like that, dems cheered on kicking illegals out. "Look how tough on terrorism and illegal immigration we are compared to W."

I thought both sides liked cheap labor and war, just saying.

Edit: I thought Obama was going to be far left, masquerading as a centrist to get elected. Not so much.
'illegals' is such a shitty term.

The difference is that Republicans/right wing nuts hide behind that to disparage all immigrants as illegal unless they are able to buy their way into the system. Obama setting the Dreamer program up was so important to the kids who grew up here due to the Republicans stopping his ability to pass it into a law. And by the end of his term he had the lowest number of illegal crossings in decades.

I would love to know how much of the complaining about job vacancies right now is due to the shit immigration policies that Trump gave us with his 'crack down' that has exploded the illegal border crossings.

Immigration is a huge benefit to our nation, and all those jobs that would be filled right now by them go unfilled, and people bitch about it.

Crazy.

I’m not sure about that to be honest. If I had to bet on it I would, but at the same time there is so much waste in government. Take covid for example. So much wealth given to the rich. You have Tom Brady getting millions etc. simply as a counter argument it’s important.
Yeah Trump and the Republicans really gave shit away during their reign.

As for sports like football, the economics are so screwed up, basically at the moment it is slave labor for everyone not in the pro's which means about 0.5% of all players end up getting paid to play.

Some podcast I was listening to made the point that abolishing inherited wealth would be one of the greatest societal goods we can do, basically wealth will do what is necessary to perpetuate itself and reforms can't occur until that power is destroyed. The majority of the countries maladies stem from that issue.

It was a good and interesting argument, a fairly simple step to resolve a bunch of issues. Good luck getting that to pass, and my goal is to set my kid up, so meh, but still was a good point.
It really would be a great innovation. People would still have every advantage in life if they were lucky enough to be born to rich parents.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
Some podcast I was listening to made the point that abolishing inherited wealth would be one of the greatest societal goods we can do, basically wealth will do what is necessary to perpetuate itself and reforms can't occur until that power is destroyed. The majority of the countries maladies stem from that issue.

It was a good and interesting argument, a fairly simple step to resolve a bunch of issues. Good luck getting that to pass, and my goal is to set my kid up, so meh, but still was a good point.
Yeah, I think there should be a limit on how much you can inherit. A million dollars should be enough for anyone for a start. If you can’t thrive on that, we’ll you’re useless.
 

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
Select the branches you’d cripple and by how much, and to what expected effect. We are very badly undergoverned right now. Enough government and that man would have done far less damage.
Did you say undergoverned? If you said poorly governed you’d have me, but I can’t think of a single aspect of my life that the government doesn’t have their hands in.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Did you say undergoverned? If you said poorly governed you’d have me, but I can’t think of a single aspect of my life that the government doesn’t have their hands in.
“Having their hands in” is pejorative.
And your refusal to answer my requests is not a good look.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Did you say undergoverned? If you said poorly governed you’d have me, but I can’t think of a single aspect of my life that the government doesn’t have their hands in.
That is because you make money from government funded programs (like rental programs) would be my guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top