|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 10:56 pm
Too much to do and not enough time to do it in....
Ish also very concerned mum has decided she needs to hook me up ~ told she found me a man... eek gonk Help! burning_eyes
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 11:12 pm
Lil Brat Too much to do and not enough time to do it in.... Ish also very concerned mum has decided she needs to hook me up ~ told she found me a man... eek gonk Help! burning_eyes Oh HELLS no!!! Does she think ya can't find one yourself!!  Also my complaint is that I'm being called a cougar cause I managed to find and befriend a 19yr old that tends to treat me better than any of my ex's  ...problem....he lives in America and he's younger than my youngest brother...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 14, 2011 2:20 pm
Typical double-standard ~ if you were male and he female, you'd be called a stud. ninja
Not sure what mum's thinking ~ I don't need her finding me new online friends to date... this actually frightens me. She can be a bit gullible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:05 am
Dont you just hate effin politics??? I mean frell ! The whole dems vs. reps Bull !!
Where in the Constitution does it say that there has to be only two choices??
Why the hell cant congress get anything done UNLESS they get paid by lobbiests??
And the thing is if you want to make a change....you have to get involved in politics. aurghh..
This rant brought on by trying to research SOPA and the rights it endangers.
AND reading stupid shite like " Obama will take our guns ". Which is retarded.
OH why the FRACk ! is it that giant Media companies have a say in the Laws that will affect regular people??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:32 pm
Frell xd Sounds like someone was into Farscape.
It's become a two party system {or rather more accurately a one party system in the guise of a two party system} because democrats and republicans had the most money and organization. Mainstream media only covers those two parties for those reasons. What helps keep everything in a two party system is the widespread mentality of people believing someone from a third party doesn't have a chance, which interestingly enough, is an idea perpetuated by the mainstream media.
People tend to vote as if they're bidding on a horse race rather than voting for someone they actually support. So if they believe someone can't win, they won't vote for them because they feel like their vote is wasted if it's on someone who "doesn't have a chance"... but what makes them not have a chance is people like them deciding not to vote for them. People want to vote on the winner rather than the person with the best policies and ideas, and the people they think can win are the people they see venerated on TV the most.
So your complaint about giant media companies having a say in laws runs even deeper than that: they pretty much dictate who gets in office in the first place by giving them the most coverage, thus making people believe this person is a winner and then they vote for them. While rather underhanded of them, the saddest part is that the masses are so easy to manipulate. Too many people see something on TV and just eat it up without doing any thinking for themselves.
Even some of those who take an interest in politics don't do enough of their own thinking and more so treat it like sports. They choose a team and get behind them 100%, never questioning the laws and policies their team supports. So long as their team is in power, that means they're winning. And because they're for one team, that means they have to be vehemently against everything that the other team stands for at all times. People who are republican will completely disregard someone's argument if that person is a democrat, and someone that's a democrat will do the same to republicans.
What people really should be doing is looking at the ideas themselves, not what party affiliation they're coming from.
And you know, if government didn't have the authority to make unconstitutional laws {which technically they don't, but they're continually allowed to get away with it}, then companies wouldn't be able to buy politicians. So easily, people are fooled into letting these kinds of laws pass because they think it's for some type of protection that needs to be in place without seeing the kinds of abuses it could {and likely would} be used for.
SOPA, for instance, has the power to take down any website for having copyrighted material on it, regardless if the site owner was even aware of it. In other words, some n00b in CB could post an excerpt from a copyrighted book, someone reports it, then suddenly Gaia is no more. They get no warning to remove it and the site owner probably didn't even realize it was posted in the first place. Of course, this makes it very easy for people to shut down websites they don't like. They don't even have to search out someone posting something that might be copyrighted... they can just post it themselves, then report it, because it doesn't even have to be put there by someone in charge of the website.
As things are now, most websites disallow copyrighted material and if someone does post it, then the user can be banned from the website. If the site owner themselves is the one that put it up there and the person or company that holds the copyright to that material doesn't like it, they give a warning and can sue them if they do not remove it. I don't see why there needs to be anything more than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:33 am
Politics and parties and politicians and the media aren't the enemy. They are just puppets of the enemy and are distracting us from the real "people" who are raping us and the planet.
Who do you think owns the governments and media? The same ones who ramrodded federal campaign finance changes to favor corporate sponsorship of candidates AND prohibited union members [people who actually work for a living... or used to, before they lost their jobs and homes and are now getting mocked by the press for being lazy good-for-nothings while the corporations buy up their properties for pennies on the dollar] from organizing for fair compensation.
Oh well! At least I still have my internet and fast food. Nothing I can do anyway. lalala.
Did that sound sarcastic? oopsie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:07 pm
Well, yes, there's always that too, but like I said, if government didn't have the power to favor corporations {which is fascism, by the way}, then politicians couldn't be used as puppets. Can't say the media wouldn't still be used, but thankfully we have the internet and we can look things up on our own and get our own information rather than trusting what the TV says. Although, with something like SOPA, that could be taken away as well and all we'd have is "approved" sources to go off of.
As for unions and "fair compensation", what constitutes as "fair" is up for debate. Sometimes unions ask for more money out of greed rather than because they think it's "fair", and then they block people who are willing to work for less than what they're demanding from taking their job. So someone who just wants to make a living and support their family isn't allowed to because the union thinks their cause is more worthy and that their members are more important.
There are also some places that won't let you work there unless you're in the union and pay union dues.
Everyone would like to get paid more for what they do so that they have more money. That doesn't mean their job actually is worthy of a higher paycheck, nor does it mean that the business they work for is magically going to have the resources to give them as much as they want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:19 am
So are you saying you're antigovernment?
Are you anti-union?
I am not quite seeing your point of view here and that makes it really hard to have a good argument. So if you'll be so kind as to make a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition, things would go much smoother. As it is, I'm almost inclined to fall back into just gainsaying any statement you make and we both know that just doesn't cut the muster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:30 am
I'm anti-collectivism and pro individual rights and liberty, which would be anti-big government and anti-union. No one should have the authority to tell others what they can and can't do with their own lives if those actions do not impose on the rights of others.
In the case of unions, they shouldn't be able to block someone from working just because they don't rally to their cause. Sure it's their right to protest for higher pay and better working conditions, but it's not their right to make others protest with them. If someone doesn't mind the pay or working conditions, then why should they not be allowed to work for that pay under those conditions?
Public sector unions are even worse because that higher pay comes from tax payers. Little do people realize that the government actually has no money... none of their own, anyway. The money they have is gotten through taxation, so for a public worker to want higher pay, that means everyone else who isn't a government worker gets more taken out of their paycheck. So in a way, for someone in the public sector to demand higher pay is indirectly demanding that everyone in the private sector get paid less.
If private sector workers want to unionize, that's their business, but they shouldn't bully others to try to achieve their goals because that's imposing on another person's rights. Public sector workers unionizing means everyone in the private sector suffers. If they want a higher paying job, then maybe they should work in the private sector.
I realize right now it's a lot easier to find a public sector job than a private sector job, but if there were major cut backs in the government, whatever jobs were lost by these cuts would be taken over by the private sector and taxpayers would be a lot better off for it because they would no longer have the burden of having to supply so many other people's paychecks.
Anyhow, I thought this was more of a ranting thread than a debate thread, so if that doesn't meet your standards, I'm not sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:33 pm
You're right. This is a complaint thread. Terribly sorry.
In that case, I want to complain about teeth. I think they should last for the life of the wearer.
*wanders off to look for an argument thread*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:45 pm
Oh man... not sure how I missed that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:15 pm
ThisEmptySoul Oh man... not sure how I missed that. LOL, at the comment above yours and the vid !! And yes im a Frelling Farscape fan !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:42 am
ThisEmptySoul Oh man... not sure how I missed that. My complaint is that when I clicked on the link, I started watching more than just the 'Complaints' clip. Then again, I love Monty Python... razz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:50 am
I've been having worsening migraines over the last many years and just got a repeat MRI monday. My complaint is that I cheated and looked at the results and I have a brain tumor and my neurologist hasn't called me yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
