Author Topic: Political Humor  (Read 101853 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #280 on: September 26, 2015, 04:16:04 PM »
It's dismaying, the amount of animosity the American news media has been able to direct at the poor and less fortunate.

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #281 on: September 28, 2015, 06:34:38 AM »
This is all kinds of perfect.

https://i.imgur.com/bCaFXO5.gifv

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #282 on: September 28, 2015, 09:43:36 AM »
It's dismaying, the amount of animosity the American news media has been able to direct at the poor and less fortunate.

Not sure what "American news media" you're talking about.  It's quite the opposite here where I am.  If any intangible, undefinable bloc controls this upcoming election it's the "poor and less fortunate".    We're getting to the point where it's overwhelming the conversation.   I am not saying that accounting for the poor and less fortunate is bad - it's not at all - but when you focus so heavily on one variable, you tend to lose sight of the other variables, and the possibility of "unintended consequences" or "blowback" increases exponentially.   It's a big part of my beef with both the ACA and minimum wage.  What could be more simplistic than the concept of "minimum wage".   And it wasn't a month after that the exact outcome the critics highlighted (and then were attacked for for being "insensitive") came to be:  yep, they'll get more money per hour, but the hours would be cut so that the net income would be the same (and actually, for ANY benefit that is earned on a per hour basis, they are worse off). 

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 9511
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #283 on: September 28, 2015, 10:15:31 AM »
It's dismaying, the amount of animosity the American news media has been able to direct at the poor and less fortunate.

Not sure what "American news media" you're talking about.  It's quite the opposite here where I am.  If any intangible, undefinable bloc controls this upcoming election it's the "poor and less fortunate".    We're getting to the point where it's overwhelming the conversation.   I am not saying that accounting for the poor and less fortunate is bad - it's not at all - but when you focus so heavily on one variable, you tend to lose sight of the other variables, and the possibility of "unintended consequences" or "blowback" increases exponentially.   It's a big part of my beef with both the ACA and minimum wage.  What could be more simplistic than the concept of "minimum wage".   And it wasn't a month after that the exact outcome the critics highlighted (and then were attacked for for being "insensitive") came to be:  yep, they'll get more money per hour, but the hours would be cut so that the net income would be the same (and actually, for ANY benefit that is earned on a per hour basis, they are worse off).

We're going to get off topic, but I couldn't find a thread for it.

I agree with the general idea that minimum wage doesn't necessarily *HAVE* to be a living wage like some people argue.   But it is indicative a larger (and growing) problem.

A more accurate gauge is a meme I just saw the other day (but can't find at the moment) of a guy who, back in the day, was able to support himself comfortably working full time as an HVAC technician.   Payments on a new truck, rent on a 2 bedroom house, and most of the other typical basic creature comforts.     But because wages have not kept up with inflation, that same job will just barely allow one to get by.    We're not talking about burger flippers here.  We're talking about reasonable full time jobs that used to reasonably support a family.     The amount of money that it takes to support a family in comfort these days is completely out of control.    You have to be deep into the 6-figure income to be able to afford the things that a common full time trade job used to be able to get by on. 
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #284 on: September 28, 2015, 10:59:28 AM »
You have to be deep into the 6-figure income to be able to afford the things that a common full time trade job used to be able to get by on.

My girlfriend and I collectively make $98,000 per year. On a good month, we're lucky to put $300 into savings (not counting our 401Ks and other investments). I couldn't fathom throwing kids into the mix. It blows my mind thinking of a time when one parent working on an assembly line could keep an entire family housed and fed.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #285 on: September 28, 2015, 11:20:41 AM »

A more accurate gauge is a meme I just saw the other day (but can't find at the moment) of a guy who, back in the day, was able to support himself comfortably working full time as an HVAC technician.   Payments on a new truck, rent on a 2 bedroom house, and most of the other typical basic creature comforts.     But because wages have not kept up with inflation, that same job will just barely allow one to get by.    We're not talking about burger flippers here.  We're talking about reasonable full time jobs that used to reasonably support a family.     The amount of money that it takes to support a family in comfort these days is completely out of control.    You have to be deep into the 6-figure income to be able to afford the things that a common full time trade job used to be able to get by on.

But - and not to argue with your specific points, but to show that it is FAR more complex than "raise pay!", the IDEA of comfort is different.  I've got a seven year old stepson who has ZERO idea of how different "comfort" is today.  He looks at a wiffle bat and ball ($3.99 today at walmart, and which was my desert island toy when I was a kid) with barely disguised contempt as he turns back to his flatscreen TV ($100) and resumes his game of Sonic on Xbox ($49 + $299). 

That's not inflation.   

Granted, there are things that are more expensive; a new car from 1975 SHOULD cost (accounting for inflation) about $15,000, but you're probably looking at something more like $25K for similar features.   

If you're talking about "living wages", we've been hoodwinked into a false standard.   In 1980, when I turned 13, we had a color TV.  And it went from a cable (not "the" cable, but a wire) to an antenna on the roof, and we got 13 channels, plus VHF.  The only cost was the sunk cost of the TV.   Now, I have to pay for the TV, and I have at least $100 a month for JUST basic cable and internet (and I know this, because that is what my other stepson, 22, is paying). 

Inflation HAS brought the amount we earn up, too, albeit not as much.   Median income in '75 was the equivalent of roughly $55K, now it is roughly $52K.  Not huge differences (about $1.44 an hour) and not accountable for what we're talking about.  Gasoline is almost exactly the same (roughly $2.50 a gallon). 

And don't even get me started on smartphones.

But - and not specifically your "HVAC Tech" example - on the flip side, we're demanding that all trades that were valid and of value back in 1975 must not only stay valid today, but be MORE valuable.   I'd love a poll here to see what percentage of people who work and are over the age of 30 are ACTIVELY (meaning, right this minute) and PROACTIVELY (without outside requirement from their current employer) training themselves for a position they couldn't currently hold (or couldn't have held five years ago).   I'd say virtually NONE.  We're simply demanding - we feel entitled to - too much of our current system.  I have personally had conversations with people who didn't take jobs because they would have to "shave their goatee".  Or move (or commute).  One guy said "that's a half an hour drive! I'm not doing that!".   The age of "creature comforts" has changed, so should the age of "doing the same job for the same company in the same location for ever increasing pay".

I would gladly and 100% pay for those that truly can't.  But I'm not interested in paying for those that won't or don't feel like it.

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 9511
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #286 on: September 28, 2015, 11:32:32 AM »
Some of the things you're saying I agree with (like shaving a goatee....get over it.  If you have to change your appearance to get a job, just bite the bullet like the rest of us, and do it).

However (and this is partially due to being in Seattle, where traffic is a nightmare), I can relate with not wanting to commute.   I live 45 minutes from downtown Seattle, and that's 90 minutes each way in rush hour traffic.  That is 3 extra hours PER DAY away from my family who honestly needs me.   I'm not saying I don't take work in Seattle.   I have done it, and I may end up doing it again.  But I often hold out for something closer if I can.    If I'm working downtown, I got desperate. 

Time with family is more valuable than the money.   Even if we all have to buckle down and tighten our belts to get by until something better comes along. 

But back on topic.   I'm not sure I agree with the absolute that absolutely EVERYONE who works full time should have a living wage, but I don't think it's an unreasonable principle.   And it's certainly something that history has shown is doable.     I would amend it to say that anyone working full time *at a trade* should be able to earn at least enough to have the basic needs, put a nest egg away, and not have to worry about going bankrupt because a child got sick. 
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #287 on: September 28, 2015, 11:34:39 AM »
As someone who spends upwards of three hours a day commuting, I'd happily opt for a 30 minute commute.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #288 on: September 28, 2015, 01:39:06 PM »
Some of the things you're saying I agree with (like shaving a goatee....get over it.  If you have to change your appearance to get a job, just bite the bullet like the rest of us, and do it).

However (and this is partially due to being in Seattle, where traffic is a nightmare), I can relate with not wanting to commute.   I live 45 minutes from downtown Seattle, and that's 90 minutes each way in rush hour traffic.  That is 3 extra hours PER DAY away from my family who honestly needs me.   I'm not saying I don't take work in Seattle.   I have done it, and I may end up doing it again.  But I often hold out for something closer if I can.    If I'm working downtown, I got desperate. 

Time with family is more valuable than the money.   Even if we all have to buckle down and tighten our belts to get by until something better comes along. 

You and I agree; I was driving about an hour and fifteen each way in Georgia, and I moved to CT for that reason:  not enough hours in the day to spend them in a car. 

But you said the magic words:  buckle down until something better comes along.  To me, "buckle down" doesn't mean "whine about wages and living wage and entitlements".   

Quote
But back on topic.   I'm not sure I agree with the absolute that absolutely EVERYONE who works full time should have a living wage, but I don't think it's an unreasonable principle.   And it's certainly something that history has shown is doable.     I would amend it to say that anyone working full time *at a trade* should be able to earn at least enough to have the basic needs, put a nest egg away, and not have to worry about going bankrupt because a child got sick.

I don't think it's an unreasonable principle, but we've morphed from "living wage" resulting in "food, shelter, clothing" to "living wage" resulting in something much different.  I don't disagree with your last sentence one bit, and would vote to support that, if the mechanism for getting there was appropriate (read:  NOT entitlements). 

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 9511
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #289 on: September 28, 2015, 02:07:41 PM »
....and to that last point (about what is considered necessary) I would ask you to hate the game, not the player. 

For example.   There was a time when a car wasn't a necessary item for a job.   You could try to raise an argument for biking or mass transit, but those would be feeble arguments, because they require pretty specific conditions.    Nowadays, having a car (at least on the west coast) is an absolute necessity for gaining employment.

Having internet access has become very similar.   In fact (even though I think it's technically illegal) most box stores no longer have paper applications any more. 

People have tossed around the idea of making it a "utility" like a phone....I'd be curious as to what you think about that proposal, but at this point I think we need a thread for this discussion and maybe the relevant posts moved over.   I'm just not sure what you'd call it, but maybe a mod could do that.
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #290 on: September 28, 2015, 03:08:56 PM »
 :rollin :lol

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #291 on: September 28, 2015, 03:40:38 PM »
:rollin :lol

While this is certainly a mature and reasoned argument on its own, would you mind elaborating a bit?

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 9511
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #292 on: September 28, 2015, 03:42:21 PM »
:rollin :lol

While this is certainly a mature and reasoned argument on its own, would you mind elaborating a bit?

I was confused as well.  There were several points made, so I'm not sure if he was laughing at one of the points, all of the points, something earlier, or maybe just the fact that a serious topic got brought up in the political humor thread.
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #293 on: September 28, 2015, 03:55:28 PM »
I believe he was making that "This sure is funny stuff in the humour thread" joke.

...my name is Araragi.

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #294 on: September 28, 2015, 04:05:03 PM »
I feel like it's much more difficult for a potential employer to contact you if you don't have regular access to a phone and/or email.
I'd also be willing to move this discussion to a different thread if someone would like to make one.

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #295 on: September 29, 2015, 01:36:23 PM »
Mike Tyson for President
An oldie but goodie

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #296 on: September 29, 2015, 11:27:26 PM »

Offline Tick

  • It's time to make a change
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9560
  • Gender: Male
  • Just another tricky day for you
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #297 on: September 30, 2015, 11:40:52 AM »
Joe Biden digests and reacts to last 2 pages of this thread...
Yup. Tick is dead on.  She's not your type.  Move on.   Tick is Obi Wan Kenobi


Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #298 on: October 01, 2015, 12:18:48 AM »
Joe Biden digests and reacts to last 2 pages of this thread...
Judging by the last pane, he really liked the Tyson for President and Trump "took our jobs" posts.   :hat

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #299 on: October 01, 2015, 12:41:58 AM »

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #300 on: October 02, 2015, 02:27:22 PM »

Offline jingle.boy

  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28309
  • Gender: Male
  • The changing of the worrd is inevitabre!!!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #301 on: October 03, 2015, 07:53:40 AM »


Funny because it's true.
if I want ice cream or a chocolate or a cake, I fucking have it
Can you imagine some alien race comes to a large nebula they've never seen before, and it just turns out it's the Federation's dumping ground for space-smile?

Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #302 on: October 03, 2015, 09:48:30 AM »
It's funny because they don't actually understand how debt works on a national scale and the difference between personal and national debt.

...my name is Araragi.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #303 on: October 03, 2015, 10:42:08 AM »
It's funny because they don't actually understand how debt works on a national scale and the difference between personal and national debt.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.   We don't always agree on the details, but THANK YOU for that (absolutely correct) assessment.

Personal household finances couldn't possibly be more different than the economics of an entire nation (let alone the largest economy in the world).

And no, there isn't an ounce of sarcasm in this post.

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #304 on: October 03, 2015, 12:21:39 PM »
It's funny because they don't actually understand how debt works on a national scale and the difference between personal and national debt.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.   We don't always agree on the details, but THANK YOU for that (absolutely correct) assessment.

Personal household finances couldn't possibly be more different than the economics of an entire nation (let alone the largest economy in the world).

And no, there isn't an ounce of sarcasm in this post.

Stadler, I think we should mark the calendar, because I think we've found a political point that we completely agree on.  ;D

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #305 on: October 03, 2015, 12:53:02 PM »
It's funny because they don't actually understand how debt works on a national scale and the difference between personal and national debt.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.   We don't always agree on the details, but THANK YOU for that (absolutely correct) assessment.

Personal household finances couldn't possibly be more different than the economics of an entire nation (let alone the largest economy in the world).

And no, there isn't an ounce of sarcasm in this post.

Stadler, I think we should mark the calendar, because I think we've found a political point that we completely agree on.  ;D

There's ice on my front lawn.  Does that have anything to do with it??  :)   

I hope you know, though, that as a general matter, all disagreement is with respect; you're clearly intelligent and well-read, and (to me, anyway) just proves that there are several ways to skin a cat.  As I get older, I'm increasingly more convinced that there is no right answer for everyone (or any meaningful way to be 'on the right side of history' as someone put it not long ago) on these matters.  They are far too complex (and thus the failure of the "household expenses" analogy).

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2788
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #306 on: October 03, 2015, 09:04:56 PM »
It's funny because they don't actually understand how debt works on a national scale and the difference between personal and national debt.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.   We don't always agree on the details, but THANK YOU for that (absolutely correct) assessment.

Personal household finances couldn't possibly be more different than the economics of an entire nation (let alone the largest economy in the world).

And no, there isn't an ounce of sarcasm in this post.

Stadler, I think we should mark the calendar, because I think we've found a political point that we completely agree on.  ;D

There's ice on my front lawn.  Does that have anything to do with it??  :)   

I hope you know, though, that as a general matter, all disagreement is with respect; you're clearly intelligent and well-read, and (to me, anyway) just proves that there are several ways to skin a cat.  As I get older, I'm increasingly more convinced that there is no right answer for everyone (or any meaningful way to be 'on the right side of history' as someone put it not long ago) on these matters.  They are far too complex (and thus the failure of the "household expenses" analogy).
Absolutely. I generally find these discussions interesting, and often enjoyable. I definitely think there's something to be said for people with different views being able to debate things in a civil way.
I know there have been instances in the past where I let myself get a bit more heated than I should have, and I'm glad people here have given me the chance to re-approach those conversation with a cooler head.

While we often disagree, I do respect you, and I look forward to plenty of discussions on all kinds of issues in the future.

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #307 on: October 04, 2015, 12:32:15 PM »
Of course it is different.  I have to actually work for my "revenue".

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #308 on: October 04, 2015, 03:36:51 PM »

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18149
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #309 on: October 05, 2015, 07:14:30 AM »
I don't know how to post a picture here,  but GREAT cartoon by Chan Lowe yesterday.   A picture of Jesus with his arm around someone, and someone else from the side yelling "A prostitute!!  How could he???"/  Then a picture of the Pope with HIS arm around someone, and someone else from the side yelling "That gay hating court clerk!! How could he???".

And it's pretty clear at this point that the meeting wasn't anything like Davis or her sheister lawyer (who has been caught red-handed lying in her defense before) have indicated.

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #310 on: October 05, 2015, 12:08:20 PM »

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3146
  • Gender: Female
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #311 on: October 05, 2015, 12:45:24 PM »
I don't get it - one provides a service where the other is denying a service. How is there a correlation here?

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #312 on: October 05, 2015, 12:49:25 PM »
*wrong thread*
« Last Edit: October 05, 2015, 01:25:45 PM by Chino »

Calvin6s

  • Guest
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #313 on: October 05, 2015, 01:04:17 PM »
Is that political humor?  If that is an actual Trump thing then it probably is better in the 2016 thread?  I'd talk about the picture itself, but arguing humor is about as humorless as things can get.

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Political Humor
« Reply #314 on: October 05, 2015, 01:24:37 PM »
I actually meant to post that in the 2016 thread. Clicked this thread by mistake.