|
Post by davedan on Oct 18, 2010 16:13:10 GMT -5
I'm putting this in dumb protest signs because if you look, it's held at a Domestic Violence Awareness Month rally of some kind. It would be almsot as good if he had a sign saying, "What's the major cause of domestic violence? Burnt Pot-Roasts"
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Oct 18, 2010 19:13:48 GMT -5
I'm putting this in dumb protest signs because if you look, it's held at a Domestic Violence Awareness Month rally of some kind. That wouldn't be so much of a problem if men would let their wives work outside the home.
|
|
|
Post by Julian on Oct 19, 2010 2:08:06 GMT -5
I'm putting this in dumb protest signs because if you look, it's held at a Domestic Violence Awareness Month rally of some kind. HUSBAND IS TEMPORARILY OUT OF SERVICE
|
|
|
Post by Julian on Oct 19, 2010 12:08:47 GMT -5
This implies they wanna bring back the Bretton Woods system actually, which pegged the US dollar to the gold ounce. It also failed spectacularly in the 70s. This however is a fairly commonplace libertarian/objectivist talking point, so I'm assuming the signholder meant that. How do you work that out? The gold standard itself failed on many occasions as a fiscal policy, and Breton Woods post WWII, added extra layers of complexity, extra mechanisms, international money markets and dually pegged the US currency as an alternative. The key point of the gold standard, or anything pegged to gold means you can't print extra money without the gold to back it up, so hence it's NOT a licence to print as much as you want without it losing value, and anyone pretending otherwise is being particularly disingenuous (not surprising for libertarians I suppose). [Edit: Not to mention value is sodding relative anyway, and unless you're going to physically regulate everyday prices, you're going to suffer from inflation, and libertarians aren't keen on regulating anything - even their bowel movements.] Possibly flogging a dead horse here, but basically Bretton Woods, was unpegging every currency from gold apart from the US, due to their inability to stick with the constraints. The previous post was written from the US myopic (libertarian) PoV, and so the constraint aside, and obvious internal inflationary pressures aside, you'd still also have the US currency devaluating against other currencies if you started printing cash without constraint, which in return would actually damage the price of gold on top of everthing else.
|
|
|
Post by askold on Nov 5, 2010 2:38:51 GMT -5
Peta is at it again. This picture was taken in Finland. The sign on the left propably says "(only) Us animals should wear fur." And the sign on the right, I don't think it means what they think it means.
|
|
|
Post by DarkfireTaimatsu on Nov 5, 2010 3:03:30 GMT -5
Peta is at it again. This picture was taken in Finland. The sign on the left propably says "(only) Us animals should wear fur." And the sign on the right, I don't think it means what they think it means. And yet, somehow I don't have problems with this picture. =3
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Nov 5, 2010 4:18:49 GMT -5
What.
What.
What.
What is this I don't even.
*head-desk*
Okay, how do you fail that hilariously? XD
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 5, 2010 5:18:59 GMT -5
I believe she is being ironic, suggesting that continued Federal Reserve Quantitative Easing will suddenly and for no reason cause the inflation rate to move from 1.1% (and decreasing) to over 25%. Even though there is no reason to believe this.
|
|
|
Post by Bezron on Nov 5, 2010 8:49:11 GMT -5
Peta is at it again. This picture was taken in Finland. The sign on the left propably says "(only) Us animals should wear fur." And the sign on the right, I don't think it means what they think it means. For the first time in my life, the answer to that question is a resounding YES
|
|
|
Post by mechtaur on Nov 5, 2010 9:25:37 GMT -5
*notices PETA picture*
These... Feelings make me feel very strange and confused...
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Nov 5, 2010 10:59:17 GMT -5
I... would consider it... err... murr?
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Nov 5, 2010 13:44:15 GMT -5
Why does the PETA pic seem PS'd?
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Nov 5, 2010 13:46:41 GMT -5
Why does the PETA pic seem PS'd? Because you're looking at things that aren't the girls.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Nov 5, 2010 13:53:15 GMT -5
The girls look too cartoony.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Joe on Nov 5, 2010 14:20:03 GMT -5
I'm putting this in dumb protest signs because if you look, it's held at a Domestic Violence Awareness Month rally of some kind. It would be almsot as good if he had a sign saying, "What's the major cause of domestic violence? Burnt Pot-Roasts" Reminds me of a picture of a guy photoboming a feminist rally with a sign that said "WASH MY SHIRT BITCH!"..I would post it, but I'm at work. I also wonder if that man survived the photo...I doubt it..
|
|