We share good ideas and conversation here.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
tacocat's badges given
lil  ·  54 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Still homeless. But I just had one the greatest days of my life

I've been broken. I've been healed by the transformative power of love, the possibility of hope even in a dark time.

Another thing that strikes me about your story is the sudden transition from darkness to possibility. That's how it happens. One minute you're on a bridge: the next you're finding a sense of Oneness with another sentient being.

Finally all through your journey, the highs and the lows, you've understood this: Stories happen to those who can tell them. I always felt that even during your saddest times, you had a sense of the narrative possibilities, so you crafted a story out of the darkness and shared it with us out here in the Hubskiverse. Sharing it helps you carry it a little more lightly.

kleinbl00  ·  54 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: If life was fair would it still be interesting?

There will always be someone better off than you, there will always be someone worse off. For me, the goal is to always be better off than that guy I was last year.

francopoli  ·  86 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: 0 of 38 members of the Texas congressional delegation support the border wallx 3

It's not a hope thing. It's an anger and frustration thing. They suck down more in SSI than I make a year, they have a full pension on top of that, have a house paid off, and with Prop. 13 in California are only paying $400 a year in property taxes, less than a third what I pay out in the sticks. And Medicare takes care of ALL their health bills. My dad retired after 30 years in a union job that offered they health care for life, so they get free Supplemental Medicare; they don't even pay deductibles. This is good for me as they are taken care of and I do not have to worry about my mom and dad ending up homeless. And here is where I start to get mother fucking hostile and angry at this generation of fuck shits.

The Boomers are the definition of privileged. They grew up in a superpower that invested heavily in the future. What did they do with the world they were given? Fucked over the planet's ecology, turned the US from the largest creditor nation ever seen to the largest debtor nation (IN EIGHT FUCKING YEARS BY THE WAY) Fucked over the educational system, tore up the unions, and sat in front of the TV for 40 years and did fuck all of nothing with the amazing gifts they were given. Computer revolution? their kids did that. Moon race? Their parents did that. They fucked up the housing market so bad I don't think it can be fixed. They turned College into a necessity then turned that need into a lifelong debt sentence while at the same time shitting on blue collar work that is in dire need of people. The one wage household died and was left as a rotting corpse in a barely read history book under their watch. Vaccinations that eliminated Polio, Measles, Smallpox etc? Their parents did that... they did so well that the anti-vax people are mow mostly the children of the people who worked so hard to eliminate those diseases. Now, Boomers like my parents whine that "those damn kids" (that they raised btw) are ruining everything and nothing is their fault. They are against tax reform unless it lowers taxes to starve the government, while also moaning that SSI is not giving COLAs. They suck down on Medicare while complaining of entitled Bernie people wanting socialized health care. And its not just my parents. It's most of them. The Boomers either became drug using burn outs (while also being the generation that waged an all out war on drugs), yuppies whom sold the industrial base to play stock market or apathetic losers who can't be assed to question the bullshit they suck down 12 hours a day from the media.

Boomers benefited from a functional government that would now be called socialist, then voted for three bands of robber barons that dismantled the benefits they were handed as children. Boomers gave us Reagan, W Bush and Trump. And while I have grave disagreements with Bill Clinton, he is going to get a pass by being lucky to get the benefits of the tech boom that masked the economic chaos of his war on pensions and unions not to mention the roll back of Roosevelt's work to separate banks from the stock market that lead to the '07 crash. More and more in my mind, it seems that everything the Boomer Generation touches turns to pure shit. The only 'hope' is that they all forgot to save for retirement as they voted to gut pensions and they all got fat and lazy so their life expectancy is dropping. We have maybe a decade left of the Boomers as a political force to have their one last hoorah at destruction, thank you for President Trump. Then the rest of us, I hope, can pick up the pieces and make some sort of future out of the ashes.

camarillobrillo  ·  181 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: So long hubski x 2

I don't know what to tell you Taco that you don't already know. Obviously the months (years?) leading up to this moment have been a rollercoaster. Perhaps, like me many times past and present, you're thinking that you've just had a stroke of bad luck lately and if people would just fuck off and give you some space to get your collective shit together everything will go back to normal. It won't. I think we both know that. The only question you need to ask yourself is how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go?

Do you have any criminal charges pending? Probation? Before you make any harsh decisions about rehab realize they WILL make those for you eventually. You'd be better off just letting go and letting God as the AA nuts are wont to say. It'll go a lot harder for you if you don't, believe me. Don't even think about driving anywhere far right now. If you plan on sleeping in your car don't you dare keep any shit in it. They will find you, and your family, love notwithstanding, WILL let you rot in jail.

Have you ever been homeless? I spent about half a year in my car and IT SUCKED. Worst months of my life. Spent a week truly roughing it when a cop dropped me at the doors of a state facility and didn't bother to check me in himself. I learned a lot about myself and the world around us that week, none of it inspiring. That is a dark road man, and it's getting colder outside. That's what stuck with me the most: the cold.

Rehab SUCKS. I've been to the best and the worst and they're all fucking miserable. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE. You will meet some truly sad and crazy individuals there. You will be sick. Hopefully they'll give you some decent meds and you'll hit the pink cloud within the week. By the month's end you'll be more than ready to get the fuck out of there. You'll think that was a one time thing and you've got your addiction under control now. You will be wrong.

You've still got family that cares about your welfare. That's a plus for sure. No matter how much you may hate them or how much you think they hate you, you've got people and that's most important. What you decide now will determine how many of those loved ones will remain once the dust settles.

You're one of us now. It's a big club. You're not special. Left unchecked you will die a lonely, excruciating death. AA is mostly bullshit. It's bullshit you would be wise to suffer through at least a couple months. There's no going back. You will have this disease the rest of your life. Like I said: HOW FAR DOWN ARE YOU WILLING TO GO?

I'll be thirty next year. My addictions have cost me half my family, several relationships, over a year in county, half a dozen hospital visits... my sanity. Yet, even with all that misery, I still go back. She welcomes me with open arms every time. One day I fear she'll never let go.

Get your shit together man. I'll keep you close to heart. Take your medicine and come back to us stronger and wiser.

thundara  ·  243 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: What do you think of Dr Jill Stein and The Green Party?

You are being ridiculous. Please stop mischaracterizing what I say. You clearly have no idea about any of my views or philosophies. Notice how instead of refuting any of my points, you simply went into an attack on my character as a whole.

I have a BS in Biochemistry. I am working towards a PhD in bioengineering. This does not make me a fascist biotechnology dictator. It does not make me an agricultural shill. It does make me more qualified to talk about this topic than you.

You're argument all along has been that GMOs are unsafe and should be banned. I have refuted that point several times, giving you several examples of evidence to the contrary. I have pointed out that the only evidence showing GMOs are unsafe has come from scientific hacks. I have pointed out that there is no correlation between the introduction of GMOs into a country and the markers of that country's health.

Do you know what labels I am perfectly fine with?

I used to manage food for a house of 60 hippies. I'd buy all of the above. I support opt-in labels driven by consumer desire. I support farmers choosing the stock of seeds amenable to their practice. But I don't support the FUD you bring to this discussion.

So I'm blocking you. Good day.

KurtAlder  ·  273 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Pubski: July 20, 2016

Just wanted to let you know you inspired me to get sober. Thanks.

bfv  ·  327 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Help me learn new things! – Art History

    -all western art before about 1400 kinda sucked, then we learned how to draw people

    -all western art after about 1915 absolutely sucks, since we forgot how to draw people (and everything else)

    -everything in between those years is so impressive it's almost baffling

0
video  ·  #documentary  ·  #syria
  ·  
insomniasexx  ·  562 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: I asked.x 4

Guys. Stop badging this post. Holy shit.

kleinbl00  ·  591 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Is There Anything Good About Men?

It's not, actually. You're just too busy being offended to notice. Read the section headlined "Stereotypes at Harvard." There's a point being made, but since that point flies in the face of "women are underrepresented because patriarchy" you tuned out and went full snark, zero refutation.

It's not even a complicated argument. Here - I'll spell it out simply:

Because it takes one womb to create one child, women are effectively assured reproduction. On the other hand, one man can have countless progeny which requires men to compete with each other in order to reproduce. This competition has genetically selected for diversity in male behavior while the assurance of reproduction in women has genetically selected for homogeny.

How 'bout simpler?

Men have to stick out and take risks if they want to have kids, while women have to survive. A man who does nothing to distinguish himself is unlikely to reproduce, while a woman who strives to distinguish herself actually reduces her ability to reproduce through undue risk.

The key phrase is actually in the text:

    Almost certainly, it is something biological and genetic. And my guess is that the greater proportion of men at both extremes of the IQ distribution is part of the same pattern. Nature rolls the dice with men more than women. Men go to extremes more than women. It’s true not just with IQ but also with other things, even height: The male distribution of height is flatter, with more really tall and really short men.

Here's how that reveals itself in GPA, with women earning better grades than men:

    A pattern of more men at both extremes can create all sorts of misleading conclusions and other statistical mischief. To illustrate, let’s assume that men and women are on average exactly equal in every relevant respect, but more men at both extremes. If you then measure things that are bounded at one end, it screws up the data to make men and women seem significantly different. Consider grade point average in college. Thanks to grade inflation, most students now get A’s and B’s, but a few range all the way down to F. With that kind of low ceiling, the high-achieving males cannot pull up the male average, but the loser males will pull it down. The result will be that women will get higher average grades than men — again despite no difference in average quality of work.

Here's how it reveals itself in the workplace, with women earning less pay than men:

    The opposite result comes with salaries. There is a minimum wage but no maximum. Hence the high-achieving men can pull the male average up while the low-achieving ones can’t pull it down. The result? Men will get higher average salaries than women, even if there is no average difference on any relevant input. Today, sure enough, women get higher college grades but lower salaries than men. There is much discussion about what all this means and what should be done about it. But as you see, both facts could be just a statistical quirk stemming from male extremity.

The article presents a statistical, evolutionary argument for why women get the shaft academically, professionally and historically without resorting to "the patriarchy." Simply put, it says that the basic underpinnings of society were created by men to one-up other men and that historically, women largely opted out because the fundamental unit of female society is smaller than the fundamental unit of male society. It goes on to say that there's conflict now because we're reshaping our society to fit women into the larger context.

But you were too busy literally getting your panties in a twist.

'member this? That's yet another example of the most controversial words I've ever committed to the internet:

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but a half dozen generations ago you bitches were de-facto property. If we wanted in your pantaloons we'd fucking ask your dad, not you. So next time you get all catty and bitchy about shit, remember that we're dealing with our instincts in your world and try not to be too fucking complicated about it.

It's part of an argument whereby I point out that both genders are adjusting to a changing social dynamic and that we ought to account for and understand the deficiencies both genders are dealing with. But, like countless times before, somebody completely lost their shit over the "a half dozen generations ago you bitches were de-facto property" part...

...without recognizing that not only is that painted as something bad, it happens to be true.

You came in looking for a "rah rah men's rights" argument so superheated that you literally ignored everything that wouldn't give it to you. And you're better than that. And you looked at it, and said "who the fuck badged this", and snarked the fuck out of it, and I called you on it, and you called it "a silly article with a rather pointless premise" instead of wondering what,

exactly,

I saw in it.

And I'm better than that and you know it.

kingmudsy  ·  651 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: 131st Weekly "Share Some Music You've Been Into Lately" Thread

Leon motherfucking Bridges.

I've seriously bonded with my dad over this music. It reminds him of 60's soul and blues, and it's new enough to not feel dated for me. Give the whole album "Coming Home" a listen, there are some amazing gems in there!

kleinbl00  ·  665 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: SpaceX Rocket carrying ISS cargo explodes

Let's be clear about something: NASA doesn't build rockets. NASA buys rockets. This particular contract went to SpaceX, a privately-funded upstart venture funded by an eccentric billionaire. Most launches up to now have been by the United Launch Alliance, the cartel formed by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. That probably sounds like two corporations working in concert but those two corporations (which operate as one for space launch) contain the merged husks of

- Lockheed

- Martin Marietta Aerospace

- RCA Astro

- GE Aerospace

- Boeing Aircraft

- Vertol Aircraft

- Rockwell International

- McDonnell Aircraft

- Douglas Aircraft

- Hughes Aircraft

...and those are just the big players.

Look. Since 2006, the United States has been prisoner to launch monopoly. From 1996 to 2006, the United States was prisoner to a launch duopoly. It's not like there's ever been a whole lot of market choice - aerospace dollars are doled out in a system very reminiscent of Soviet patronage. Even Ben Rich said so (he was griping about the Rockwell B-1B, pretty much the last thing Rockwell made, which might explain why they ended up getting eaten by McDonnell Douglas rather than Lockheed). So for the past 20-plus years, the price of a space launch as been "whatever the fuck we want." Not because NASA has things that dialed but because the military-industrial complex has us that over the barrel.

Worthy of note: SpaceX's launch platforms are the only ones IN HISTORY not derived from WMD research. Know the real reason nobody ever tries to land the rocket after it launches the payload? 'cuz they're all derived from mutherfucking ICBMs.

So yeah. You can be snarky but fuckin' A we're so knee-deep in predatory privatization that sweet holy jesus there's little reason to be bad-mouthing competition, particularly when it's coming from a company that has never once gotten a bailout, built a bomber or faced congressional hearings.

JackTheBandit  ·  807 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: How Many White People Does It Take to Ruin a Good Joke?

    Hold on, am I getting the impression that these jokes are supposed to innately trying to harm or degrade white people, and it's bad that white people are joining in on the fun?

    No, hell no. The jokes are fun and awesome because it shows that no race is better than others, and that everyone has their quirks. Being able to laugh at yourself is a core part of being a decent human being.

    Perhaps it is saying that it's not cool that people are trying to dodge insults by putting it down to a group rather than keeping jokes about race? I'm not too sure what to say about that, because people do tend to make jokes about themselves, and secondly, the white people in every single group will make fun of every other group until everyone is effected.

    That is, unless we want to start talking about how starbucks and uggs is misogyny, and we shouldn't be making those harmful jokes about an empowering female culture, which I wouldn't put beyond the writers of this article.

    And, if this is a case of other races trying to "get back" at white people, to insult, to degrade, etc, than it is wrong as hell and shouldn't be tolerated.

I preface this by saying I know nothing of your personal ethnic, cultural, etc. background. I've mentioned mine on Hubski before; it is similar to that of the author. The point she is trying to express in general is that white people lack the relevant cultural context to join in on the joke in the 1st place. A neutral similar situation would be when kids hear/see their friends using a new slang term. They may not have an understanding of where the slang came from but can observe (see: reading black twitter, listening to rap and Beyonce, etc.) use of the slang and feel empowered to use the slang with that amount of context alone.

A perfect example during my lifetime was the life cycle of the term "bling bling." To black people with the relevant cultural context of Southern trap style rap music, bling bling is an exclamation of acquiring items beyond the means of your immediate environment. Items representative of lifestyle that is perceived to be unattainable due to systemic oppressions. So when you got some dope shit, it's bling bling. It's use in mainstream rap, which was consumed by white america at large via entities like MTV portrayed it as black people getting shiny things. The previous cultural context never made it those people. I'm pretty sure if you asked a white person about the term they wouldn't give you an answer beyond shiny jewelry from rappers in the late 90s. So the term becomes devalued by their use and therefore played out (read: joke ran into the ground.)

So to bring it back around. This article is about white people making jokes without understand the intended humor and seeing only the surface context of potential situations for appropriate application. Specific to the "________ be like," which I believe originated as "niggas be like" among black people themselves on twitter mind you, the joke is about hypocritical and contradictory behaviors of your friends relevant to a larger event. i.e. "Niggas be like I'm broke, but drivin a BMW." That is the correct use of that joke with correct cultural context. And it's not even like white people can't make jokes with relevant cultural context, you see it in places like /r/AdviceAnimals all the time.

This article is addressing a frustration within the black community specific to appropriation. Whenever black people come up with something new within our communities, there's a legitimate acknowledgement, understanding, and anticipation that white people will eventually try to participate in it WITHOUT gaining the relevant cultural context. Fantastic current example: Twerking & High Fashion coming out with "Urban Caps" aka Durags and gelled baby curls hair styles for women because it's "in." But black people suffered scrutiny under the banner of respectability politics for those same items for YEARS. LITERALLY YEARS. Now /gif/ has twerking porn threads.

    How about we draw a fine line between where jokes are harmful to a group, and where they are not, rather than using this shitty, and incredibly arbitrary (even situational) power definition.

    Because, you can't just claim that because a black person is black, they have no power in a situation. People have power over others at all times, and you can hurt anyone even as the most poor, most oppressed, most pushed down member of society. Any decent person looks to others for support and consideration, not just those above them, and not showing them that support at any moment is not a good thing, regardless of circumstances.

No man, this is an honest statement, when white people become aware of cultural developments in black communities, it almost never ends well. History supports this statement quite well. Essays have and probably will continue to be written about it.

No one even claimed black people were powerless, that's not even a point of the article. It's about self awareness of the relevant cultural context required to appropriately make the joke. If you aren't coming from the same place; you aren't making the same statement.