|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
United States42694 Posts
On April 14 2017 01:12 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2017 00:05 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2017 22:15 Danglars wrote:On April 13 2017 11:25 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2017 08:37 Danglars wrote:On April 13 2017 06:22 Madkipz wrote:On April 13 2017 05:19 Shield wrote:On April 13 2017 00:08 bardtown wrote:On April 12 2017 22:32 Shield wrote: Could increase of homelessness be explained with seemingly less Christians nowadays? I don't go to church, but I know people there are eager to help like in bardtown's story. I'm not saying non-Christians don't help, I'm just saying church is more organised than random people in the streets. On the other hand, charity as an organisation might be more popular in the UK. Charity is huge in the UK, but I don't think throwing money at things is enough. A weaker church probably results in less social support. I have clergy in my family and most of what they do is visiting the bereaved and people in hospital. Also a lot of organising community events. I think people underestimated the role of the church and it has not been adequately replaced. Might as well point out that I'm not religious while on the topic before some moron accuses me of being a right wing religious fundamentalist as well as a retarded bigot. Offtopic, but is there even a right wing religious fundamentalist? I thought genuine Christians were leaning towards left wing or socialism. Even the bible itself tells you that if you have a pair of something, then you should give one away. Socialism is a Marxist ideology. The religious christian default leans heavily on Classical liberalism in which chase it is mostly a matter of the individual taking responsibility within the community, and a reliance on the free market solving the human condition rather than a nanny state taking care of everyone. The belief is that Socialized benefits like free abortion and socialized hiring practices, socialized education and socialized charity removes and takes away the responsibility of the individual in favor of a collective irresponsibility that tears away the moral fiber that acted as a glue upon civilization for thousands of years. They are not wrong. A bunch of our taxes is spent so that others can afford to make the sort of mistakes that would have been stern reminders of the harsh realities of life a mere 50-100 years ago. What he said. It's focused on the individual helping, donating his own time and money, and the church community helping those in need. Outsourcing those duties to the state, reaching into the pocket of your neighbor to help out, isn't really mentioned. Acts of the Apostles was completely wasted on you wasn't it. Did I miss the apocryphal chapters on the remarkable programs they set up with Emperor Tiberius or Pontius Pilate? The guys who walked and lived with Jesus decided to set up their own community and await the second coming. And when they decided how they would structure their community they decided to use the rule "from each according to his means to each according to their needs". And when Ananias and Sapphira decided they weren't into the whole communism thing (because the follows of Jesus literally founded a communist commune after he went back to heaven) the Holy Spirit showed up and disemboweled them (honestly I suspect the other Christians did but whatever). Acts literally describes the people who knew Jesus best going "hey, let's make a communist commune" and then the ones who go "fuck you, I got mine" end up being killed by God. I'm not religious so it doesn't trouble me but Jesus had a lot of words for rich people who ignore those in need and absolutely none of them were good. What individuals did in an open membership community is miles away from political rule with mandatory taxation. The Church already does aspects of this in soup kitchens and the like ... an actual application of the teaching. The fake socialism tie-ins aren't focused on the individual, it's about forcing everyone In top-down manner to accept bureau-run charity run by taxation. Reread Acts if you think "fuck you, I got mine" is even close to a textual reading. You can think Christians ought to support a lot of things if you're unfamiliar with the religion. In a country as wealthy as America you don't fulfill your obligation to give away your wealth to those who need it most by giving people some fucking soup.
If you ever actually have to stand face to face with Jesus and he goes through your life with you and asks you why you didn't offer to let that homeless guy sleep on your couch or take a shower in your bathroom and why you took a vacation instead of giving the money unconditionally away to someone who needs it, well, good luck with your "but soup kitchens!" argument.
A tax deduction exists for charity. If you actually follow Jesus's teachings in the first place you'll never have to pay a penny of mandatory taxation. The only Christians complaining about being taxed to help the needy are the ones who didn't show up to help the needy in the first place. And those guys are absolutely fucked if they ever have to explain themselves to Jesus. If you live in America the odds are that you're wealthy beyond all imagining compared to a Jewish populist in the 1st Century. He said you should give away food when food was basically all people had. If you're driving a $50,000 truck and spending thousands of dollars a month on restaurants, entertainment systems, vacations and so forth then soup isn't meeting the mark.
But again, read fucking Acts, look in the mirror, ask yourself if you're being the best Christian you can be. If you answer yes, try it again because nobody is. If you answer no, do better. Even by engaging in the exercise of reflection and actually asking that question you're still being a better Christian than the vast majority of American Christians though.
Fucking soup kitchens man. Job done, we gave them some soup. Sure, Jesus said no rich people in heaven but we gave away 0.001% of what we had by buying some soup, that totally justifies what we held onto.
|
What's up with the Christianity debate by Americans (and Kwark, who is culturally American) in the UK thread? UK is not USA. Most people only goto church for weddings, funerals and christenings. There are some deeply Christian evangelical British but they are in the minority and mostly apolitical. People do identify themselves as Christian, but it does not reflect in their thoughts and actions in their life. The arguments used for and against government social services in the viewpoint of Christian ethics is totally alien to the British societical and political discourse.
Basically, this is all a very interesting insight to American culture, but is as relevent as discussing Mohammed's poltical leanings as applied to British culture of charity and government social services.
_____
On April 14 2017 01:25 KwarK wrote: If you're driving a $50,000 truck and spending thousands of dollars a month on restaurants, entertainment systems, vacations Why?????
|
On April 14 2017 01:50 Dangermousecatdog wrote:What's up with the Christianity debate by Americans (and Kwark, who is culturally American) in the UK thread? UK is not USA. Most people only goto church for weddings, funerals and christenings. There are some deeply Christian evangelical British but they are in the minority and mostly apolitical. People do identify themselves as Christian, but it does not reflect in their thoughts and actions in their life. The arguments used for and against government social services in the viewpoint of Christian ethics is totally alien to the British societical and political discourse. Basically, this is all a very interesting insight to American culture, but is as relevent as discussing Mohammed's poltical leanings as applied to British culture of charity and government social services. _____ Show nested quote +On April 14 2017 01:25 KwarK wrote: If you're driving a $50,000 truck and spending thousands of dollars a month on restaurants, entertainment systems, vacations Why????? Because cars can cost 50K in the US for reasons. Trucks are marketed as a vehicle that manly men drive to accomplish things in life like carrying steel I-beams.
|
On April 14 2017 01:25 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2017 01:12 Danglars wrote:On April 14 2017 00:05 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2017 22:15 Danglars wrote:On April 13 2017 11:25 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2017 08:37 Danglars wrote:On April 13 2017 06:22 Madkipz wrote:On April 13 2017 05:19 Shield wrote:On April 13 2017 00:08 bardtown wrote:On April 12 2017 22:32 Shield wrote: Could increase of homelessness be explained with seemingly less Christians nowadays? I don't go to church, but I know people there are eager to help like in bardtown's story. I'm not saying non-Christians don't help, I'm just saying church is more organised than random people in the streets. On the other hand, charity as an organisation might be more popular in the UK. Charity is huge in the UK, but I don't think throwing money at things is enough. A weaker church probably results in less social support. I have clergy in my family and most of what they do is visiting the bereaved and people in hospital. Also a lot of organising community events. I think people underestimated the role of the church and it has not been adequately replaced. Might as well point out that I'm not religious while on the topic before some moron accuses me of being a right wing religious fundamentalist as well as a retarded bigot. Offtopic, but is there even a right wing religious fundamentalist? I thought genuine Christians were leaning towards left wing or socialism. Even the bible itself tells you that if you have a pair of something, then you should give one away. Socialism is a Marxist ideology. The religious christian default leans heavily on Classical liberalism in which chase it is mostly a matter of the individual taking responsibility within the community, and a reliance on the free market solving the human condition rather than a nanny state taking care of everyone. The belief is that Socialized benefits like free abortion and socialized hiring practices, socialized education and socialized charity removes and takes away the responsibility of the individual in favor of a collective irresponsibility that tears away the moral fiber that acted as a glue upon civilization for thousands of years. They are not wrong. A bunch of our taxes is spent so that others can afford to make the sort of mistakes that would have been stern reminders of the harsh realities of life a mere 50-100 years ago. What he said. It's focused on the individual helping, donating his own time and money, and the church community helping those in need. Outsourcing those duties to the state, reaching into the pocket of your neighbor to help out, isn't really mentioned. Acts of the Apostles was completely wasted on you wasn't it. Did I miss the apocryphal chapters on the remarkable programs they set up with Emperor Tiberius or Pontius Pilate? The guys who walked and lived with Jesus decided to set up their own community and await the second coming. And when they decided how they would structure their community they decided to use the rule "from each according to his means to each according to their needs". And when Ananias and Sapphira decided they weren't into the whole communism thing (because the follows of Jesus literally founded a communist commune after he went back to heaven) the Holy Spirit showed up and disemboweled them (honestly I suspect the other Christians did but whatever). Acts literally describes the people who knew Jesus best going "hey, let's make a communist commune" and then the ones who go "fuck you, I got mine" end up being killed by God. I'm not religious so it doesn't trouble me but Jesus had a lot of words for rich people who ignore those in need and absolutely none of them were good. What individuals did in an open membership community is miles away from political rule with mandatory taxation. The Church already does aspects of this in soup kitchens and the like ... an actual application of the teaching. The fake socialism tie-ins aren't focused on the individual, it's about forcing everyone In top-down manner to accept bureau-run charity run by taxation. Reread Acts if you think "fuck you, I got mine" is even close to a textual reading. You can think Christians ought to support a lot of things if you're unfamiliar with the religion. In a country as wealthy as America you don't fulfill your obligation to give away your wealth to those who need it most by giving people some fucking soup. Are you standing in for God? There's a lot of comparisons to beggars in Africa that say you can't hold on to even a dollar in disposable income because you are still comparatively wealthy and not sufficiently personally uncomfortable in your living arrangements.
If you ever actually have to stand face to face with Jesus and he goes through your life with you and asks you why you didn't offer to let that homeless guy sleep on your couch or take a shower in your bathroom and why you took a vacation instead of giving the money unconditionally away to someone who needs it, well, good luck with your "but soup kitchens!" argument. If you presume to lecture Christians about what their Deity would think because you think a socialist interpretation is supreme, find a new religion.
A tax deduction exists for charity. If you actually follow Jesus's teachings in the first place you'll never have to pay a penny of mandatory taxation. The only Christians complaining about being taxed to help the needy are the ones who didn't show up to help the needy in the first place. And those guys are absolutely fucked if they ever have to explain themselves to Jesus. If you live in America the odds are that you're wealthy beyond all imagining compared to a Jewish populist in the 1st Century. He said you should give away food when food was basically all people had. If you're driving a $50,000 truck and spending thousands of dollars a month on restaurants, entertainment systems, vacations and so forth then soup isn't meeting the mark. We're talking about Biblical support for socialist, welfare spending, not general complaints about the tax burden.
But again, read fucking Acts, look in the mirror, ask yourself if you're being the best Christian you can be. If you answer yes, try it again because nobody is. If you answer no, do better. Even by engaging in the exercise of reflection and actually asking that question you're still being a better Christian than the vast majority of American Christians though.
Fucking soup kitchens man. Job done, we gave them some soup. Sure, Jesus said no rich people in heaven but we gave away 0.001% of what we had by buying some soup, that totally justifies what we held onto. It's a justifiable act in accordance with Acts on spelling out the difference between the State and the local Church. Going off on comparative charity is a humorous attempt to justify your bad interpretation. Yeah you can be wrong about what it says and ALSO start out about how good or bad Christians are complying with it in their lifespans. Let's just agree you're wrong about State-compelled charity being the same as local Church community giving as laid out in Acts, and you can afterwards make a wonderful religion thread about how Christians aren't living up to their example, it'll be great fun!
|
On April 14 2017 01:50 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What's up with the Christianity debate by Americans (and Kwark, who is culturally American) in the UK thread?
The short answer is somebody asked a broad question and got good and bad answers. It's probably time to move back to uniquely UK political issues.
|
United States42694 Posts
On April 14 2017 01:50 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2017 01:25 KwarK wrote: If you're driving a $50,000 truck and spending thousands of dollars a month on restaurants, entertainment systems, vacations Why????? + Show Spoiler [re: truck prices] +DETROIT -- How high can prices for high-end pick-up trucks go?
Right now, there's no end in sight.
Over the past several years designers have continued to push the limit, elevating the price of high-end pickups past $50,000 and then past $60,000. And that's just for the full-size pickups. The average price for most high-end versions of the larger heavy duty pickups exceed $70,000.
Today's top-of-the-line trucks have heated steering wheels, heated and cooled seats, aluminum wheels, along with all of the latest high-tech features such as rear-view cameras and blind spot monitoring systems — not to mention enough chrome to blind onlookers on a sunny day.
Every time Detroit's Big 3 automakers -- General Motors, Ford and Fiat Chrysler -- roll out a higher-level truck they discover there is even more demand than they anticipated, leading executives to predict the industry will continue to push the limit.
"Have we found the ceiling yet? I don't think so," said Stuart Pierce, marketing manager for the GMC Sierra.
In 2014, what a consumer paid for a car or truck sold in the U.S. hit a record high average of $32,386 — a 17.5% increase compared with 2004, according to Edmunds.com, while the average transaction prices for the entire pickup segment has risen to $40,696 over the same period, a 41.3% increase.
Doug Scott, Ford's truck group marketing manager, said many of the customers who are paying $50,000 or more for a pickup are paying even more for the horses or horse trailers that the truck is being used to tow.
"I think we can go higher," Scott said. "The customer that wants exclusivity. I definitely don't think this is the limit or the ceiling."
With no apparent limit to demand or a ceiling for a top-end price, it's not surprising to see automakers continuing to pursue more sales with ever more luxurious trucks. The profit margin for the average pickup truck is about $10,000 and it's much higher for the higher priced models.
Scott acknowledged that it doesn't cost much, in terms of product development or engineering, to pick out higher quality materials and tech features and add them to the already existing manufacturing process.
Still, Ram CEO Bob Hegbloom said automakers must be careful. The trucks have to exude both toughness and quality.
"You can't just put a higher price sticker on it," he said.
What, exactly, is a luxury pickup truck?
Depending on who you talk to, luxury pickups are defined as a pickup truck that costs either more than $40,000 or more than $50,000.
Some take issue with the term luxury truck, saying the truck owners seek to maintain the tough image a pickup projects.
"What we've learned from them is they really don't view them as luxury vehicles, because luxury starts to sound soft. So they really want to define them as premium and refined trucks," Pierce said.
Whatever they are called, each of the Detroit Three's truck brands has at least one high-end model.
Ford said last week it is bringing back the top-of-the-line Limited trim level of the F-150 for the 2016 model year, describing it as the "most advanced and luxurious truck ever."
The truck, which will go on sale this winter, will sell for more than $60,000. It has unique 22-inch aluminum wheels, a special grille and badging in places such as the tailgate.
Ford's luxury truck models also include the Ford F-150 Lariat, which starts at $39,310 and the Ford F-150 King Ranch, which starts at $49,120.
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles sells the Ram 1500 Laramie that starts at $39,275 and the Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn that starts at $47,185.
In addition, Ram announced last month that an updated version of its Ram 1500 Laramie Limited starts at $50,675.
The Laramie Limited includes Argento wood, all-black, full-leather seating, a leather-wrapped steering wheel, real wood interior components and unique badges that the company describes as a "black-tie" luxury alternative to the popular southwestern-themed Laramie Longhorn edition pickup.
Hegbloom said about 29% of Ram's light-duty pickups sold for $40,000 or more in 2009. Today, 67% of the brand's pickups sell for more than $40,000.
At GM, the top-of-the-line trucks include the GMC Sierra 1500 SLT that starts at $46,810, the GMC Sierra 1500 Denali that starts at $49,665 for two-wheel drive versions and the Chevrolet Silverado High Country that starts at $45,100 for two-wheel drive versions.
So far this year more than 50% of the GMC Sierra models sold were either Denali or SLT versions, Pierce said.
The Detroit Three got into trouble back in the late 1990s and 2000s when they became overly reliant on customers who were buying big SUVs and "lifestyle" pickup truck buyers who bought the trucks simply because they liked them. Those buyers, who rarely used the capability of their pickups, fled the segment as gas prices spiked and the recession hit.
But today's luxury pickup buyers are different than the lifestyle buyers of yesterday. The people who buy today's luxury pickups tend to be ranchers, horse owners or small-business owners, Hegbloom said.
Often, the buyer might be the owner of a small construction company and is buying a small fleet of trucks for the business but wants a high-end truck for personal use to set his truck apart from the others.
"These people go outdoors and enjoy the outdoor space and they want a vehicle that also portrays what they have accomplished," Hegbloom said.
Pierce said more than 60% of the buyers of a GMC Sierra 1500 Denali or Sierra 1500 SLT live in farming or rural areas.
"These are people who are using trucks," Pierce said.
During 2008, when gas prices zoomed past $4 per gallon, pickup truck sales slumped as some people opted for smaller cars.
Over the past year, gas prices have been relatively low and stable. Those low prices have given American consumers more discretionary income and have contributed to a decline in sales of small and alternative fuel cars. The fastest-growing vehicle segment in the U.S. are small and mid-sized crossovers.
Automakers say luxury pickup sales are less susceptible than they were in the past to gas prices. That's partly because they are more fuel efficient and also because the buyers are different.
"These are people who can't live without a pickup truck. I can't see them, the largest majority are not going to switch segments," Pierce said.
Driving around in America in one of the poorest states maybe 20% of all cars on the road are giant new trucks that cost more than the average family living here make in two years. They're high enough that you can't see the homeless panhandlers begging for help at every intersection. America really is very, very different from the UK. $50,000 on a new truck isn't even high at this point, you could do $70,000 pretty easily.
|
Growing up in rural US, trucks have their uses and often can last decades if cared for. But there isn't much difference between a 10K used truck and a 30K truck.
|
On April 13 2017 22:53 LightSpectra wrote: The idea that Jesus of Nazareth was not a real person is a fringe minority position in academia, but it's super popular among atheists that cherry pick historical facts to fit their beliefs.
I don't think it matters that it is a fringe position (which I dispute). First of, most academia in theology are going to have a personal religious bias. So all theistic academia you can already ignore.
But even besides that, the nature of the field is such that a layperson will have as much expertise to judge a certain position as someone from within that field, which is completely different in my own field. There are two historical documents that mention Jesus, and they date 93 AD and 116 AD. And one of them even religious scholars admit is not authentic/has been changed. Even the earliest religious texts mentioning Jesus do not even claim to be contemporary.
That there is a big minority or small majority of academia in the field that claim they believe Jesus existed as a historical figure on the one side, but freely admit there are no contemporary sources at all, that is baffling to me. I guess for all those people it just comes down to the idea that a religion about one person has to have had it's origin in one person. But it can as easily have been that Jesus is based on a dozen historical persons and preexisting figures of myth. And if you press them, some these academia will then finally admit that is what they believe when they say there was 'a historical Jesus'. And this is true even for some theistic scholars. When pressed, they will admit they as academia do not believe in a historical Jesus. That kind of double-think is common among theistic academia.
In the end, the only argument these scholars have is that there are no Roman or Jewish sources contemporary to early Christianity pointing out the silliness of worshiping this character of Jesus that, to them, clearly was a fictional person. That is all they have. The fact that Tacitus didn't bash on Christians by claiming thier Jesus was a fictional person.
That around 100 AD there was a sect around the mythological figure of Jesus, I do not dispute.
Also, your use of the 'fringe minority' hyperbole betrays your rhetorical intent.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Overpriced trucks, preferably ones which are absurdly expensive to repair because they break all the time, are pretty much the time-honored means by which Americans sink an assload of money on something closely approximating their ego.
|
On April 14 2017 02:19 Plansix wrote: Growing up in rural US, trucks have their uses and often can last decades if cared for. But there isn't much difference between a 10K used truck and a 30K truck. Toyota made an indestructible truck that got a war named after it for its reliability and ability to operate in the desert. You can get one of those for even less than 10K and keep it running just fine compared to newer trucks.
High end trucks are in a weird zone where they cross the line of when you needed a tractor type before but now a high end truck can do it and is road legal. It's something that makes sense now but people didn't think of it before.
Also what KwarK said people love them some trucks in the sticks.
|
I heard this thread is now about trucks?
|
I heard you liked trucks, so I got you a British one.
+ Show Spoiler +
How is "taking back control" going on? Do you feel empowered to control the UK? :D
On a different note, as someone who lives in the UK, I meet so many atheists. My expectation was that the UK is more conservative/traditional. So, it's a surprise that I see and hear more about American Christians than British ones. I mention America because it's seen as a liberal country, in films at least.
|
The UK is far more atheist than the US. The US is probably the most religious western country and the UK is one of the least. I often feel like even for those who identify as Christian, many do so in a cultural sense and don't actually have any faith. It does depend where you live though. People in rural villages are more conservative and religious in general.
No, not in control yet. It's going to take some time unfortunately. That is a lovely lorry though.
|
On April 14 2017 06:19 Shield wrote:I heard you liked trucks, so I got you a British one. + Show Spoiler +How is "taking back control" going on? Do you feel empowered to control the UK? :D On a different note, as someone who lives in the UK, I meet so many atheists. My expectation was that the UK is more conservative/traditional. So, it's a surprise that I see and hear more about American Christians than British ones.  I mention America because it's seen as a liberal country, in films at least. Thats not a truck thats a semi trailer. You need a specific endorsement for your license to drive one of those. Tesla Semi could legitimately be the niche that Tesla needs to become a legitimate car maker superpower. having charging stations for overnight truck stops would be easy to install and pretty practical with the 12 hour limit on drivers per day.
Critical truck feature below + Show Spoiler +https://mrsunshineblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/truck-nuts.jpg
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
In 2020 be ready for the announcement of Tesla Trains.
+ Show Spoiler +Oh wait he already did that.
|
We call that a truck in the UK. We also call it a lorry. Maybe widen your mind a little sermokala. So no, it is not a "semi-trailer" and I've never heard it refered to as such, and he is correct to call it a truck. Hence why I was confused why Kwark consider owning a truck as some sort of wealthy pursuit. I wasn't wondering about the cost. I was wondering about the truck part. As for your trucks, we call them...pick-up trucks. They aren't popular in the UK mostly because they are too wide to fit into parking spaces and smaller side roads. Though reading about them was interesting.
|
Truck is the American word. Lorry is the British one. Same vehicle.
|
Americanization of UK in effect here
|
I call pick-up trucks bakkies. South Africans have the best words!
|
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
|
|
|
|