|
|
On December 16 2011 11:47 StyGGeN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:42 hmunkey wrote:
Dude, I just linked you the numbers...
If you're going to make broad claims, at least make sure they're factually correct. The things you said were stupid and wrong. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=povertyfeel free to check out the inequality too, and as for the prison stats i presented, guess they were bullshit too. Gn
Yeah, so I was right...
The link I shared actually had the numbers you were referencing btw, so it's probably a better one. It also had the poverty rates by different sources. Regardless, the US was not absurdly different or terrible and that is including the fact that the US the nation out of all of those with the highest number of immigrants and refugees.
|
On December 16 2011 11:51 hmunkey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:47 StyGGeN wrote:On December 16 2011 11:42 hmunkey wrote:
Dude, I just linked you the numbers...
If you're going to make broad claims, at least make sure they're factually correct. The things you said were stupid and wrong. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=povertyfeel free to check out the inequality too, and as for the prison stats i presented, guess they were bullshit too. Gn Yeah, so I was right... The link I shared actually had the numbers you were referencing btw, so it's probably a better one. It also had the poverty rates by different sources. Regardless, the US was not absurdly different or terrible and that is including the fact that the US the nation out of all of those with the highest number of immigrants and refugees.
So America being around 17th place isn't bad? okay. I guess ur standards have gone down.
And if u look at the numbers the avarage is quite alot of %points down from the united states. But w/e.
Anyways, ill head off to bed with a question to you. Regarding ur last statement.
How did the indians of north america multiply into over 300 million people of all sorts of ethnic descents?
|
What's with all the  nonsense?
|
On December 16 2011 11:49 NB wrote:
is there an exact posted time on when will they resume?
10am EST tomorrow morning. Just less than 12 hours from now.
|
On December 16 2011 11:59 StyGGeN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:51 hmunkey wrote:On December 16 2011 11:47 StyGGeN wrote:On December 16 2011 11:42 hmunkey wrote:
Dude, I just linked you the numbers...
If you're going to make broad claims, at least make sure they're factually correct. The things you said were stupid and wrong. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=povertyfeel free to check out the inequality too, and as for the prison stats i presented, guess they were bullshit too. Gn Yeah, so I was right... The link I shared actually had the numbers you were referencing btw, so it's probably a better one. It also had the poverty rates by different sources. Regardless, the US was not absurdly different or terrible and that is including the fact that the US the nation out of all of those with the highest number of immigrants and refugees. So America being around 17th place isn't bad? okay. I guess ur standards have gone down. And if u look at the numbers the avarage is quite alot of %points down from the united states. But w/e. Anyways, ill head off to bed with a question to you. Regarding ur last statement. How did the indians of north america multiply into over 300 million people of all sorts of ethnic descents?
What? Through immigration... that's literally what I said. Please learn to read, because you've been saying things that don't even make sense based on what I said.
Having huge amounts of immigrants (legal or not) inevitably means a country will have higher poverty rates. Sure, the US could completely shut out immigration and the poverty rate would drastically fall, but that isn't what's happening. You can't ignore this unless you're in the business of lying.
Once again, sort the table and look at the poverty rates. They're actually measured by purchasing power so you can compare them. Of course I'm assuming you understand what those concepts mean and why they matter.
Anyway, this is completely off-topic and I have no idea why you decided to randomly bring up misleading, fabricated, and irrelevant "facts" to attack the US in general, but ok. There are plenty of problems with the US, but if you want to actually argue that America is fucked up do it correctly. Come on.
|
USA, Land of the free
or???
|
On December 16 2011 13:07 eqez wrote:
USA, Land of the free
or???
land of the free corporate overlords. Not that europe is in much better shape.
|
The law is BS, but do you think that many of us are exaggerating and blowing things out of proportion?
|
Is it possible to download that session? I don't do video editing, but for something like this it might be good - to show Americans how absolutely insane some people they voted in are.
|
I don't know if everyone has read the bill of not but wired.com is keeping up with it. Just to clarify sites ending in .com .org and .net are not covered in the bill. It looks like it's mainly to kill overseas sites.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/12/sopa-stalls/
Hopefully this still gets defeated. I'm not sure the US Government wants a bunch of angry netizens flocking to Anon lol.
|
On December 16 2011 15:54 YarNhoj wrote:I don't know if everyone has read the bill of not but wired.com is keeping up with it. Just to clarify sites ending in .com .org and .net are not covered in the bill. It looks like it's mainly to kill overseas sites. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/12/sopa-stalls/Hopefully this still gets defeated. I'm not sure the US Government wants a bunch of angry netizens flocking to Anon lol.
That quote by Watt really reflects just how uninformed he is.
And that .com .org .net thing makes absolutely no sense. They do know it's thepiratebay.org, right? The main thing they bring up with this bill. Am I missing something?
|
I say we get out the pitchforks (cellphones) and light the torches (twitter) and flood (spam) those backing the bill til their offices cannot operate.
|
So my Politics major friend just really put this in perspective for me. While this is certainly important legislation, the united states is literally involved in so many horrible awful things, not limited to contributing to global warming, a massive economic crisis worldwide, foreign wars, the list goes on. Point being, there are so many more important issues facing the government today than the freedom of the internet, as important as that is.
All that said, the enthusiasm for this whole process is by no means a bad thing, but I hope that we all take this (at least for me) newfound interest in the congressional process, and apply it to more substantive problems that our legislation can potentially contribute to solutions for.
|
On December 16 2011 18:07 eluv wrote:
So my Politics major friend just really put this in perspective for me. While this is certainly important legislation, the united states is literally involved in so many horrible awful things, not limited to contributing to global warming, a massive economic crisis worldwide, foreign wars, the list goes on. Point being, there are so many more important issues facing the government today than the freedom of the internet, as important as that is.
All that said, the enthusiasm for this whole process is by no means a bad thing, but I hope that we all take this (at least for me) newfound interest in the congressional process, and apply it to more substantive problems that our legislation can potentially contribute to solutions for.
The internet belongs to the people, not of one country, but of the world. This is worth fighting for infinitely more than wars, economic crises, global warming or whatever for one simple reason: The internet is the last bastion where free speech is actually guaranteed, allowed and uncensored. Especially as an American, you should understand this: It is your most basic principle on which your country is founded, it is the first right given to you in the constitution, and it is what you pride yourselves on in front of the rest of the world.
There should be nothing more important to you than this for that reason alone.
|
On December 16 2011 15:57 Zalithian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 15:54 YarNhoj wrote:I don't know if everyone has read the bill of not but wired.com is keeping up with it. Just to clarify sites ending in .com .org and .net are not covered in the bill. It looks like it's mainly to kill overseas sites. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/12/sopa-stalls/Hopefully this still gets defeated. I'm not sure the US Government wants a bunch of angry netizens flocking to Anon lol. That quote by Watt really reflects just how uninformed he is. And that .com .org .net thing makes absolutely no sense. They do know it's thepiratebay.org, right? The main thing they bring up with this bill. Am I missing something?
Yea that last bit about only foreign sites blows my mind.
Why are they not having expert testimony?
|
So this shit actually got passed? Oh mang
|
On December 16 2011 21:50 NagAfightinG wrote:
So this shit actually got passed? Oh mang
Not yet. The hearing resumes at 11am EST today. If it passes here it can go to the supreme court and ultimately can be veto'd by Obama.
The amendment stating that .com/.org/.net domains don't fall under the provisions of the bill is a dim ray of light in a shitstorm.
|
Not that I agree with the bill but why would they exclude com/.org/.net domains?
|
is praying for the internets :< hope these people in court have some brain left and reject that thing :>
|
In one way I hope it will pass since it would (hopefully) spark more participation/activism/awareness from the public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
