prev <-> next
[2018-10-29 12:45:21] - Actually, a LOT of my positions are down big over the past year. So many appealing opportunities. I guess this is why some people set aside a cash position.
Any thoughts from the message board about what opportunity looks best in the market right now? -Paul[2018-10-29 12:23:58] - but I can't believe Amazon is below $1600 right now. It's my largest position but I can't help but want to buy more at this price. -Paul
[2018-10-29 12:21:41] - Daniel: I think there's lots of evidence to suggest people vote for personalities over policies too. -Paul
[2018-10-29 12:20:35] - Daniel: I guess I see the will of the people as being overrated. What if the will of the people is machine guns for all? homosexuality is illegal? Also, I question whether there is a specific thing like "will of the people". What if 50% of Americans don't know or care about pre-existing conditions or the war in Yemen or Russian collusion or whatever else? What is the will of the people there? -Paul
[2018-10-29 12:18:20] - a: "of course i want trump voters to vote" Why? This makes absolutely no sense to me. If you want everybody to vote regardless of who they vote for, that tells me that it almost doesn't matter to you who people vote for, it matters more that they vote. Would you rather have 90% voter participation and 4 more years of Trump or 20% voter participation and.. I dunno, Elizabeth Warren? -Paul
[2018-10-29 11:29:58] - Maybe I work to change people's minds. Maybe I figure out why Trump is appealing to so many. Maybe I move to Canada. /shrug But I think overall I tend to believe in people having some "good" in them and if we can vote on that "good" and get enough to do so then we should end up better and not worse. "Good" is pretty vague though so clearly there will be disagreements and bumps on the way. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 11:28:26] - I think ideally everyone would vote and then we would correctly know "the will of the people". I know we aren't a true democracy on everything because people have to have jobs and do things other than vote on everything that comes up before congress individually. But I think the closer we come to will of the people the better. If the will of the people is Trump then so be it. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 11:15:48] - maybe becoming a voter is what will awaken their interest in politics. ~a
[2018-10-29 11:08:03] - yes, of course i want trump voters to vote. ~a
[2018-10-29 10:57:19] - a: I'm sure that could be wrong, but I kinda doubt it. Would be happy to see evidence to the contrary. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:56:51] - a: Um... I guess? I don't think my overall argument hinges on that, but that specific one is based on the idea that politically engaged people tend to be more informed and more likely to vote, and that those who don't vote either don't care as much and/or don't know as much. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:54:24] - Daniel: And if the answer is yes, then I guess I don't really understand why considering how I know a lot of left-leaning people feel about Trump and his supporters right now. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:53:40] - Daniel: I guess the question I want to ask a bunch of people is: "Do you really want Trump voters to vote?" If the answer is no, then I feel like there's a lot of... maybe not hypocrisy, but at least people being disingenuous when they say they're just trying to get people to vote. Just own up to what you are trying to do: increase turnout for your side. I respect that a lot more. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:51:54] - paul: are you assuming that the people who are currently voting (the ones that aren't being pressured to vote) are politically informed? or more informed than the average? these (one or both) might be misconceptions. ~a
[2018-10-29 10:48:01] - Daniel: Or maybe somebody thinks that candidate D supports laws to ban all guns and confiscate them. Is that opinion just as valid as somebody who knows that candidate D simply supports background checks or something more reasonable? -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:46:36] - Daniel: "I'm not sure you have to be an expert on politics to have opinions on abortion, guns, the environment, or gay marriage for example." Agreed that you don't have to be an expert to have an opinion, but I would rather an informed opinion than an uninformed one. What if somebody thinks abortion is about terminating a pregnancy at 8 months? Is their opinion as valid as somebody who knows the nuances of actual abortion policy? -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:44:37] - Daniel: If the majority has a will, sure. I'm mostly speaking about the 50% or so of Americans who apparently don't care about politics enough to vote. What is the likely result if we put them in front of a voting booth and tell them to vote? They're not going to be making any kind of informed decision at all, I think. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:43:52] - I'm fine with people trusting experts or ceding their opinion to trust an expert. I'm not sure you have to be an expert on politics to have opinions on abortion, guns, the environment, or gay marriage for example. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 10:42:50] - Daniel: And most practical of all, do you want people who fundamentally disagree with you to vote? I realize this isn't necessarily the same group of people, but it's weird to me that we're at a place that people are demanding that some people get fired for expressing their point of view but at the same time we're trying to encourage them to vote? -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:41:28] - Paul: I'm not totally sure I agree with that. Probably mostly agree but maybe not 100%. I think we want to protect against the whims of the majority and there is stuff about the tyranny of the majority and you want to be careful but I think the point of any government should be to reflect the will of the people that it governs. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 10:39:43] - Daniel: Also, does the will of the people matter if they don't really follow politics and know what's going on? In almost every aspect of life, we give higher priority to people who have knowledge in a particular area. Why not politics as well? In a general sense, I would rather the informed and engaged people vote than people who don't know what's going on. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:37:52] - Daniel: "I think the more people vote the better our goverment reflects the will of the people." Probably true, but I'm not sure that's the ultimate goal. We don't have a pure democracy for a reason, and we have lots of things in place like the Bill of Rights to specifically protect from the will of the majority. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:34:47] - a: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rock-the-vote-midterm-psa-celebrities-didnt-vote-in-last-midterm/ Presumably you were referring to this? I thought the celebrities were talking about voting in a midterm, not a presidential election, so it seems like a more apples to apples comparison. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:33:27] - paul: I don't really agree with your voting article though. I think the more people vote the better our goverment reflects the will of the people. Seems fairly basic / fundamental to me. Also the idea that any one vote is not important I get but you can't generalize that so it seems like a fallacy to me. I think we've had this part of the conversation before though. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 10:32:13] - paul: I get that it can be hypocritical but I think celebs do all kinds of endorsements that might not match their personal preference. So I'm not super moved by that level of hypocracsy. -Daniel
[2018-10-29 10:29:15] - i.e. if i'm in a GOTV PSA and i implore people to vote in the presidential, but then don't vote in the midterms, i don't see the hypocrisy. ~a
[2018-10-29 10:28:13] - paul: right and i'm purposefully differentiating between midterms and presidential. ~a
[2018-10-29 10:21:22] - a: I think it's hypocritical to create a PSA imploring people to vote and telling them how important it is.... when you yourself don't vote. Yes. I'm fine if celebrities don't vote as long as they're not going around trying to guilt trip everybody else into voting. Hypocrisy to me is more about actions matching words, not necessarily right versus wrong. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:18:41] - well you've called it hypocrisy. so you kinda have. i don't think it's hypocritical. ~a
[2018-10-29 10:15:42] - a: Because I don't really blame anybody for not voting. That's kind of the point of my post. -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:11:04] - a: Sorry, I'm not sure the context here. I assume it's from my most recent RD post? -Paul
[2018-10-29 10:04:11] - paul: "did not vote in the last midterm" sorry, but i can't blame people for not voting in midterms. it matters, of course. but it matters less? do you agree? (no representative could have done as much damage to the country, and possibly world, than trump has done in the past two years, imo). ~a
[2018-10-28 22:41:52] - Xpovos: Not killing you as badly as Celgene is killing me. Who knew pharma companies cold be so volatile?
-Paul[2018-10-28 10:25:49] - I'm so frustrated (that I can't type!) that MMM the blue chip stock with strong pedigree, lots of products that sell well, and massive dividends is the stock that is destroying my stock picks. I added it as my 5th because I didn't have a good option for a high growth #5, so I wanted something for stability. My STABLE choice is the one tanking my portfolio. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-28 10:24:42] - I
[2018-10-28 10:24:39] - I
[2018-10-27 19:24:00] - aDaniel: Thanks. Anything I can do to make it easier to follow the sites or be informed when there are new posts? Not sure what the kool kids are doing these days... RSS and bookmarks feel old skool. -Paul
[2018-10-26 14:25:23] - mig: of course, i agree the methodology or definitions would be useful information (and hell even listing a fucking source would be nice). ~a
[2018-10-26 14:23:53] - a: Well I'm a little surprised St. Louis is up there but not Chicago. Baltimore's has been notable in its uptick of violence. I guess it would be helpful in knowing how they measure "violence" for these metrics. - mig
[2018-10-26 14:18:11] - mig: agreed, but i also see four cities in the united states. four cities here and zero cities in . . . i dunno i always imagined the united states as "safe" and international travel was "dangerous". if anything, this seems to imply otherwise. i'd be safer traveling to kashmir or kiev or manila or madrid or dubai or some city in northern ireland than popping by the national aquarium? ~a
[2018-10-26 14:07:21] - a: I'm not surprised really. Mexican and South American violence is pretty well documented and its pretty horrific. - mig
[2018-10-26 13:08:49] - 50 most violent cities (2017, war zones are excluded). i'm surprised by these results. zero cities in europe? zero in australia and zero in northern africa, and zero in asia? wtf man. i would have expected at least one city outside of these two areas. ~a
[2018-10-26 12:39:52] - Paul: I just go check the site every so often. -Daniel
[2018-10-26 12:34:04] - vehicle owned by the maga bomber (alleged). a little bit too on the nose. ~a
[2018-10-26 11:18:59] - i click on the link every few weeks or so. ~a
[2018-10-26 10:51:13] - Random question: For those who read Rampant Discourse or Paul Vs The Market, how do you usually get notified of new content or how do you follow? Do you just check the website every week or so? See me post to Facebook? Follow me on twitter? Subscribe to RSS or subscribe by email? -Paul
[2018-10-25 13:11:46] - don't we all. back when bush was president, though, i wasn't really mad at republicans. i was just mad at bush (and his administration). this time around, though, it seems to be the whole party that's fucking up shit nonstop. not just the president. ~a
[2018-10-25 13:09:35] - Remember when everyone hated Bush? God, I miss those days. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-25 12:51:37] - a: Trump is President. You aren't tired yet? -Paul
[2018-10-25 10:50:57] - yeah, i was talking about the other one. i want to be tired of winning. ~a
[2018-10-25 09:53:17] - a: You still have a huge lead in Q3 even with AMD having a tough day. -Paul
[2018-10-25 09:43:57] - paul: ha, nice. i was in 1st place where i belong for one night. i'll be back. ~a
[2018-10-25 09:32:23] - Oooh, and a good report from Twitter too. This should be a good morning for both my stock market challenge portfolios... -Paul
[2018-10-24 16:36:26] - Really nice earnings report for Tesla. I'll be super disappointed if it follows the path of Netflix and gives up all of its after hour gains tomorrow and ends up dropping big a few days later.
-Paul[2018-10-24 15:53:05] - Daniel: Thanks! Should be fixed now. I don't have an editor for pvtm to catch these things for me.
-Paul[2018-10-24 15:28:04] - Paul: "How could I note love Netflix with all of my investing heart?" - not trying to be annoying just pointing out the subtle typo. Don't know if you are where you can fix it though. -Daniel
[2018-10-24 15:15:57] - well beating the market is hard
~a[2018-10-24 14:14:48] - a: Which on some level is fine, and completely expected and I am not panicking at all, but on another level, the first quarterly check-in is going to look ugly and it might be hard to maintain readership if I'm like, "Well, my attempt to beat the market is off to a rough start and I'm down 10% versus the market so far". -Paul
[2018-10-24 14:13:27] - a: So if I am measuring performance versus the market, it would be less than ideal to start off right before a big market dip because even thought the market is down a fair amount right now, the Freedom Portfolio is down much more. -Paul
[2018-10-24 14:12:46] - a: Hmmm. Well, I think the Freedom Portfolio has a high "beta" in the sense that when the market is up, it tends to be up more, but when the market is down, it tends to drop more... -Paul
[2018-10-24 14:08:00] - if there is a "wrong time" to get into the market, then probably something is off about how you're looking at the results. ~a
[2018-10-24 14:07:53] - a: Oh, I definitely agree and am not worried. But if I had just waited a few more weeks, my "cost basis" would've been so much better.
-Paul[2018-10-24 14:03:44] - nah. you gotta look long term. a year from now you'll be able to say that you came in during a minor dip in the market and are still beating savings accounts, and bonds, and etc etc. ~a
[2018-10-24 14:00:18] - I'm beginning to think I started the Freedom Portfolio at exactly the wrong time.
-Paul[2018-10-24 13:16:32] - I'm not sure there will be much of an impact in traffic. The thing that I would be wondering about is the housing prices near wherever area they decide to go for. - mig
[2018-10-24 13:15:32] - Centreville, too, which is going through a lot of development near my house. - mig
[2018-10-24 13:14:52] - "In its request for proposals, Amazon laid out a handful of characteristics it said it wanted for HQ2. It preferred an area with more than 1 million people, an urban or suburban location that could attract tech talent and a business-friendly environment. Amazon also asked for proximity to an international airport, access to mass transit and a spot near major highways." all those qualities pretty much match up with Dulles/Reston. - mig
[2018-10-24 13:13:31] - jesus the HQ2 thing is *still* going on? I would have thought a decision would have been made already. - mig
[2018-10-24 11:34:28] - a: There we go. https://www.oag.state.va.us/media-center/news-releases/1299-october-24-2018-attorney-general-herring-launches-clergy-abuse-hotline -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 16:31:56] - a: But, yeah, it could easily be a disaster, since there's little reason to think local governments wouldn't offer everything under the sun. -Paul
[2018-10-23 16:31:29] - a: My hope is that it isn't just all about the tax breaks for Amazon, and that the DC area has enough going for it (Bezos' home, the Washington Post, large educated workforce, Dulles airport, AWS, data centers, metro, lobbying, etc) that the deal isn't THAT bad for whoever in the DC area wins. -Paul
[2018-10-23 16:24:17] - paul . . . yeah actually it might mean that fewer people are driving *into* dc for work. i hear you, that could be *amaz*ing. it'll be interesting to say the least. but i'm being a big worrier on this thing. if the tax breaks are big enough for amazon to consider it, the net gain might necessarily be negative. ~a
[2018-10-23 16:04:24] - a: I think it'll be a net gain long term, but it's purely a guess. For me, it depends on exactly where the location is and how they handle traffic. If it's near Arlington, I don't see how that doesn't make the traffic issue worse. If it's out west closer to Dulles or Ashburn... traffic might be able to be handled better there. -Paul
[2018-10-23 15:47:15] - sure, i'll take dc area. my question is: is this good for us or bad for us? they'll likely get huge tax breaks, so in many ways this will likely be a net drain on our infrastructure. it *might* help our our real estate market (possibly negligibly), but it might not be worth it if our local governments all go broke because of it. ~a
[2018-10-23 14:49:13] - Paul: Field for me. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 14:41:44] - Would you all take the DC area or the field? -Paul
[2018-10-23 14:41:22] - http://time.com/money/5426010/where-amazon-hq2-will-be/ For some reason, the fact that everybody thinks it will be Northern Virginia (or the DC area) makes me think it's less likely to be. -Paul
[2018-10-23 14:03:45] - My vacation is officially over. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 14:03:35] - Meanwhile, in truly local news for the day we've got this: https://www.arlingtondiocese.org/Press-Releases/2018/Diocese-of-Fall-River-priest,-serving-in-Arlington-Diocese,-placed-on-leave/ -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 14:02:59] - Honestly, that's still not the big news. RICO investigations is. That's happening and will probably go forward. That'll be fun. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 14:02:35] - a: Yep. That's local but not me. At least not yet. There's bound to be some spillover, though. And to get ADW they're going to get need to get MD to buy in too. And if DC and MD are doing it, there'll be a ton of pressure on VA--even more than there already is. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-23 14:00:47] - xpovos: washington dc catholic news showed up on my reddit feed. ~a
[2018-10-23 14:00:19] - yeah i know, i know. ~a
[2018-10-23 13:34:44] - a: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/aurora-cannabis-stock-debuts-on-the-nyse-falling-94-on-heavy-volume-2018-10-23 You might not want to update the ticker on the spreadsheet.
-Paul[2018-10-23 10:52:58] - maybe it just hasn't showed up yet. i guess i'll update the stock challenge once it's more clear what has happened. in the mean time i'm going to leave that row highlighted. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:52:06] - i just assumed, but i guess maybe i own shares on nyse now. that's so weird though: usually something shows up in my transaction history when one of these weird events happens. like a stock-split, or a symbol name change. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:51:30] - paul: maybe i do. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:48:48] - a: My guess is that there isn't a transaction to go along with it since you still own the same thing you owned before, just that the ticker might've changed since it's a different exchange. A little weird you own shares traded on the Toronto exchange and not NYSE, though. -Paul
[2018-10-23 10:41:46] - paul: something weird is happening to one of my stocks on the challenge. according to my broker, instead of otc shares of "acbff", i now hold shares directly in the toronto stock exchange "acb". i heard that aurora is starting trading on nyse, so maybe that's why this change started? nothing is showing up in my transaction history about this, so it's not clear exactly what happened. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:37:36] - paul: more generally, holding fewer stocks are going to be very volatile when the market as a whole is being volatile. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:36:58] - paul: yeah, i've noticed the same thing about many of my stocks. when the market is up, mine are up more. when the market is down, mine are down more. over a long enough period of time this is good because the market will be up in the long run. however, that's a bad thing as we get closer to retirement. ~a
[2018-10-23 10:20:53] - As I suspected, the same stocks that helped me beat the market during good times is taking a painful walloping during bad times. Every time the market drops 1% it seems like my portfolio drops 2%.
-Paul[2018-10-22 20:54:57] - Xpovos: I hadn't checked in a bit. Things have certainly tightened up (in the 2018 one anyway). -Paul
[2018-10-22 20:49:55] - By avoiding the race to the bottom, I'm back in first place? Nice. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-22 20:05:36] - Not planning on buying any lottery tickets. I'm not opposed to gambling or doing things that make no sense from a statistical perspective (probability?)... I play blackjack in Vegas. I just don't get any enjoyment from lottery tickets. -Paul
[2018-10-22 15:44:30] - Daniel: I am. The expected value is there. Plus I'm feeling lucky. I did a Magic thing with aaron the other day and pulled some ridiculously high value cards. Might as well buy a ticket when my luck's running hot. -- Xpovos
[2018-10-22 15:30:03] - I have a ticket for the lottery tomorrow night yeah. I'm not sure yet whether I would admit to winning even if I did? Hmm maybe probably? So you can ask Wednesday morning
-Daniel[2018-10-22 15:18:36] - daniel: not terribly hard, no. either way, i can play vicariously. are you playing? if so, when should i ask if you won or not? ~a
[2018-10-22 15:11:40] - For reason 1. there do you think its hard to buy one? I mean it does definitely take time/effort but given that literally any convenience store sells them it seems like not a hard burden to get one. Just an unusual argument against lottery tickets I guess! -Daniel
[2018-10-22 15:10:24] - a: Very true, but if you could play 300 million times you'd come out ahead! -Daniel
[2018-10-22 15:06:32] - daniel: nope. for two reasons: 1. your expected value calculation doesn't take into account the time+effort to buy a ticket. 2. you aren't focusing enough on the standard deviation. your standard deviation (or variance) for playing the lottery is all outa wack: the distribution of winners to players is too sharp of a curve for it to be interesting to me. i'd have to play a few million times before it'd be remotely interesting. ~a
[2018-10-22 15:03:14] - Lottery tickets (mega millions at least) have a positive expected value! Anyone who normally abstains from the lottery going to try it out? -Daniel
[2018-10-18 14:00:56] - all she had to do was give the boy a lower dose and it would have been (only slightly) harder to catch. ~a
[2018-10-18 14:00:03] - genius. something makes me think she's not the first person to try to do this. ~a
[2018-10-18 12:54:45] - bring me . . . (source) ~a
[2018-10-18 09:59:51] - a: I think with a long enough gap those can be sufficient but with Diablo the core mechanic is fairly repetitive so I'm not sure if those would be sufficient for me. Maybe eventually though? Or if one of those elements turns out to be done super well maybe? -Daniel
[2018-10-18 09:50:03] - daniel: it's been about 4 years since Reaper of Souls released, I think that's probably enough time for them to look at a new game. If this was kind of "OH new expanison w/ one new act and class" I'd probably just pass. I kind of regret getting the Necromancer pack. - mig
[2018-10-18 09:44:46] - daniel: won't it be all of the above? starcraft 2 gave a ridiculously improved graphic engine, new game play, new story lines, new skill trees, and more. i don't know shit about diablo though. ~a
[2018-10-18 09:42:36] - mig: What would differentiate D4 from D3 at this point? Graphics Engine update? A new story? New skill trees? I guess it depends on how much it costs - I'd be tempted eventually but it doesn't seem super compelling. -Daniel
[2018-10-18 09:20:07] - https://us.diablo3.com/en/blog/22549433/diablo-at-blizzcon-2018-10-17-2018 diablo 4? - mig
[2018-10-17 23:05:33] - a: I was super disappointed in the market today, actually. Netflix looked like it was going to be up 15% today which would've been huge for my second biggest holding but the overall market was down and so it ended up being up only like 5%. -Paul
[2018-10-17 23:04:36] - a: You should follow me on twitter.
I wondered how the marijuana companies would react to Canadian legalization and speculated that they might "sell on the news". -Paul[2018-10-17 16:07:51] - a: doesn't work on mobile, apparently. - mig
[2018-10-17 13:56:38] - mig: you can click on mark warner. for example, here is that link ~a
[2018-10-17 13:54:30] - so it could be because I'm looking on their mobile site, but is there more detail? Grades are ok and some of the pols have tags to provide more context to their positions, but some just have a grade, which I can make assumptions about, but isn't too useful. Like what about Mark Warner's positions give him a "C"? - mig
[2018-10-17 13:52:00] - seems like there's less hardliners against legalization than I would have thought. Encouraging? - mig
[2018-10-17 13:47:55] - here's how virginia politicians stack up on that topic. ~a
[2018-10-17 13:11:05] - i know canada legalized recreational marijuana, but i'm not sure why that would make the stocks go down. ~a
[2018-10-17 13:10:14] - paul: also, please explain what happened to the marijuana stocks. they dropped bigly this morning (like -10%) then regained it all back throughout the morning. ~a
[2018-10-17 13:09:11] - new topic is the stock market! i'm happy that we have a calm day today, i was worried we'd see at least -1%. ~a
[2018-10-17 12:30:11] - paul: last word eh? hmmm. "pleistocene" - aaron
[2018-10-17 11:52:12] - aaron: But likewise, Handler's defense seems pretty ridiculous considering her dick sucking comment. Anyway, we're going around in circles now, and you're right that I guess I just don't get what makes things offensive and what doesn't, so I'll let it drop and/or let you have the last word. -Paul
[2018-10-17 11:50:09] - aaron: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/roseanne-barr-says-she-didnt-know-valerie-jarrett-was-black-apologizes-tells-her-to-get-a-haircut That she thought she looked like a character from the movie? I'm not trying to defend Roseanne, like I said before, I'm 90% certain she meant it racially and besides that the comment is still offensive in other ways... -Paul
[2018-10-17 10:36:20] - but yeah if the aryan brotherhood tweeted something like "it's national coming out day, when are you coming out lindsey??" then that has obvious homophobic implications. is that what you're suggesting, that the tweet was like, "hey! admit you're one of them!!! you're not welcome here!" - aaron
[2018-10-17 10:34:46] - paul: i'll reiterate, what is a hypothetical alternative intent when saying "planet of the apes"? how does that tweet make any sense if her target is nonblack? would roseanne describe Cyndi Lauper as half planet-of-the-apes? i admittedly don't know about handler's "history" but given that the tweet seemed centered around gay pride i'd be astonished if the tweet was intended to diminish gays - aaron
[2018-10-17 10:29:38] - aaron: "it depends on the intent of the speaker" Okay, so then the baseball announcer who said "chink in the armor" is off the hook? What about Roseanne? She claimed her intent when saying "monkey" wasn't to be racist. That seems about as believable as Handler's defense (given her history) to me... -Paul
[2018-10-17 10:23:14] - aaron: ok, understood thanks. ~a
[2018-10-17 10:19:33] - or said another way if an LGBT group and the Westboro Baptist Church both held simultaneous rallies and both chanted "lindsey graham! come out of the closet!" one would be homophobic and the other wouldn't, because one's intent is clearly "set an example for LGBT republicans" and the other's intent is clearly "admit you're a sinner" - aaron
[2018-10-17 10:16:39] - a: yeah sorry, my intended meaning was "lindsey graham is gay, said within the context of that tweet = not homophobic," everything depends on the intent of the speaker. something like "Angelina shouldn't have won that oscar" could be homophobic if the person meant it that way - aaron
[2018-10-17 10:09:51] - aaron: i know i mentioned this yesterday, but you didn't reply to me. and i hate to belabor this argument that seems to be non-progressing, but "lindsey graham is gay = not homophobic" goes against "it depends on the intent of the speaker and their opinion on gays". in the first, you're saying "it doesn't depend" and in the second you're saying "it depends". if you're ok saying "it depends" then i think you and i can agree. ~a
[2018-10-17 10:08:37] - like the difference between a 5-year old child blurting out stream-of-conscious style "this movie theater has a lot of black people" versus a geriatric racist grandmother warning you while clutching her purse, "this movie theater has a lot of black people". one's not racist, the other's racist. why did they say it? what was their point? the tweet's point was, "hey it's national coming out day" - aaron
[2018-10-17 10:03:34] - paul: "that seems to be exactly what handler is doing" yeah, it's not. sorry, that was what the whole "lindsey graham is gay = not homophobic" thing was yesterday. it depends on the intent of the speaker and their opinion on gays, but that's not really an insult unless it's framed with the understanding that the speaker actually has a negative opinion of gay people - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:57:25] - aaron: "perfectly OK resolution to this kind of conversation" Yeah, sorry for bringing this up again. I guess the right answer is that we just agree to disagree. -Paul
[2018-10-17 09:56:09] - at first i thought people like that with trolls or assholes, or surely they were just playing devil's advocate because their behavior was so blatant. but a lot of them try really, really hard to make friends in communities and they're banned or ostracized and why everyone hates them or what they did to anger anybody. it's just a difference in how their brains work, or how they relate to other people - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:56:03] - aaron: "using a racial slur is offensive to people of that race" And I'm assuming that you are saying this to reference the "chink in the armor" comment, but I don't see how it applies. Tanaka is not Chinese, so he's not of that race, even if we assume that chink is a slur in all contexts. -Paul
[2018-10-17 09:54:52] - aaron: "insulting someone by calling them a specific race is offensive to people of that race" Does the same go for sexuality? Because that seems to be exactly what Handler is doing, yet I'm hearing it's not offensive. That's why I don't get it. -Paul
[2018-10-17 09:53:10] - and lastly, "i have no idea why things are offensive" is a perfectly OK resolution to this kind of conversation.... i've communicated with people who say things like, "i was solving puzzles like this in kindergarten," and "can't you even read english?" and don't understand why that's insulting either. some people have trouble understanding insults or comprehending other people's feelings - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:47:41] - the intent of "chink in the armor" was innocuous because the statement makes sense regardless of the target's race. you would call an irish basketball player a "chink in the armor" the "valerie is half gorilla" statement is offensive because it makes no sense if the target is non-black. would roseanne describe Cyndi Lauper as half gorilla? how would that make any sense? - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:42:21] - that said coincidentally using a phrase like "niggardly" or "chinks in the armor" is yeah more of an edge case and that's when it comes down to intent. obviously an innocuous phrase like "the rams deserved that loss" can be homophobic depending on context and the intent of the speaker but i don't think these particular examples you've given are nuanced at all - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:39:53] - paul: using a racial slur is offensive to people of that race. saying someone might be a specific race isn't offensive to people of that race. insulting someone by calling them a specific race is offensive to people of that race. i hate to play the "it's not complicated" card but after 3 days it's kind of strange to not have a handle on it, i'm sure you didn't just start contemplating this on monday - aaron
[2018-10-17 09:36:58] - a: a roast beef sand witch
- aaron[2018-10-17 09:19:47] - Daniel: But somebody who is clearly trying to make fun of somebody else by implying he is gay or somebody referring to a black person putting on a "minstrel show" for a white person is okay? -Paul
[2018-10-17 09:19:02] - Daniel: I guess I have no idea where your line is for offensiveness. Like, I'm baffled that a legitimate phrase used by somebody who is part Chinese to describe a Japanese person during a live event that happens to contain a word that can be a slur for Chinese people is considered offensive... -Paul
[2018-10-17 09:17:27] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minstrel_show I don't know if it's a trap question, but it could be argued there is a racial element to the comment. "Blackface minstrelsy was the first theatrical form that was distinctly American." and "On the one hand, it had strong racist aspects". -Paul
[2018-10-17 08:51:22] - aaron: i don't know, what do you call a sunburned cow wearing a pointy hat on the beach? ~a
[2018-10-16 23:35:37] - what do you call a sunburned cow wearing a pointy hat on the beach?? - aaron
[2018-10-16 15:52:31] - Paul: I agree that people get offended over dumb things sometimes. The chinese prom dress was dumb. A lot of college campuses and halloween I think are dumb. So we agree on that. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 15:49:52] - Paul: I feel like that is a trap question but I'm not sure I know about minstrel show being an offensive thing? Maybe if there something that somebody educated me on or something? Given the context of our conversation it seems possible that it is?
I don't know though. -Daniel[2018-10-16 15:40:02] - Daniel: Would it be wrong to say Tim Scott put on a minstrel show for Donald Trump? -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:39:22] - https://www.glamour.com/story/qipao-prom-dress-controversy-response For example, the Chinese prom dress thing caused outrage among some Americans, but apparently most Chinese people didn't take offense. -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:37:43] - Paul: I don't share that takeaway at all. It would not be ok to make racist remarks about Tim Scott or compare him to planet of the apes. It would be wrong to call the head of the Log Cabin Republicans offensive names. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 15:36:16] - There's a narrative about how a lot of these big controversies (the Redskins name, cultural appropriation, etc) are ginned up by white liberals who are outraged on behalf of groups who largely don't care. I don't know if there's anything to that narrative, but there's anecdotal evidence supporting it. -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:34:14] - "what I'm drawing from the general reaction is that homophobic, sexist, and racist remarks are mostly OK as long as the target of such remarks is a conservative or otherwise non-progressive." That's a hard takeaway for me to dismiss... -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:33:46] - aaron: I didn't mean to necessarily dance around it, I just didn't think it was helpful to bring up. Yes, it does seem like liberal groups either (A) tend to get outraged more or (B) we hear about their outrage more. Ultimately, that's probably the simple answer here. Like Miguel said... -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:32:34] - a: I think I've heard of that before? Maybe NPR talked about it at some point? I think at the time I was surprised it was that high but I'm not super shocked at the overall not offended result. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 15:28:02] - paul: that is very interesting, thanks for the link. anybody else surprised by the washingtonpost link from paul? daniel? aaron? ~a
[2018-10-16 15:18:34] - paul: i mean i think one thing you're kind of dancing around without saying directly, is that because the internet is mostly liberal-minded, and hollywood and the mass-media are mostly liberal minded -- that stuff that offends liberals is more offensive - aaron
[2018-10-16 15:04:24] - But I think both tweets are offensive, and I guess I worry about not being able to recognize the line anymore about what is acceptably funny and what isn't. Sarah Jeong's stuff? Not really my cup of tea, but I can see how it could be funny and I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt... -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:02:19] - Probably the biggest disagreement is that I think Handler's tweet and Roseanne's tweet are.... in the same neighborhood in terms of offensiveness. There are obvious differences, and I'm not saying they are the same at all. I would even agree Roseanne's was more offensive... -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:00:45] - a: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_sto I do not. -Paul
[2018-10-16 15:00:06] - a: I don't even know if I necessarily think she's a d-bag (well, actually, I probably do think that, but not because of this). Again, I think comedians should be allowed to make offensive jokes, I just think that even if we're being charitable, this joke is probably a little offensive... -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:59:59] - paul: "see the Redskins controversy" don't mean to derail here, but i don't follow the premise of this. i'm pretty sure actual native americans (at least 50%?) are against the redskins team name. do you feel this is not true? ~a
[2018-10-16 14:58:51] - a: I might be in the Handler is a d-bag in general camp? Just not for that tweet in particular. The 2nd tweet is more d-bag-y but don't think its homophobic either. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 14:57:54] - aaron: ""lindsey graham should start wearing kneepads to senate hearings in case there's a surprise dick that needs to be sucked" = homophobic" So isn't that similar to her earlier tweet asking whose dick he sucked to be blackmailed, or whatever? -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:56:22] - aaron: "those statements aren't offensive to gay people in general. roseanne's statements are offensive to black people in general" Do we know this? I don't know of any way to measure this. A lot of times when I hear things like this, it actually ends up being refuted by actual data (see the Redskins controversy). -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:54:11] - aaron: "lindsey graham might be gay" = not homophobic. are you sure about this? what if the context is, that i intend it to be derisive (regardless if it should be taken derisively?). anyways, i think we're falling into the two camps: the paul and adrian camp that think handler is a d-bag? and the daniel and aaron camp that think handler is awesome? ~a
[2018-10-16 14:44:39] - daniel:
- aaron[2018-10-16 14:41:38] - aaron: That made me laugh out loud at work. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 14:38:31] - "lindsey graham might be gay" = not homophobic. "nickelback is gay" = homophobic. "lindsey graham should start wearing kneepads to senate hearings in case there's a surprise dick that needs to be sucked" = homophobic - aaron
[2018-10-16 14:32:54] - paul: i don't think anybody's saying she wasn't teasing graham. we're saying that those statements aren't offensive to gay people in general. roseanne's statements are offensive to black people in general - aaron
[2018-10-16 14:30:41] - paul: i think she picked "gay" because coming out as gay it's the first thing literally everybody on the planet thinks of when they hear "national coming out day." it would be like associating "national listening to music day" with "music". i think a majority of people would even struggle to think of a second thing people could come out as, on that particular day - aaron
[2018-10-16 14:29:30] - paul: i don't understand your nickelback metaphor... is your implication that, on "national coming out day," she cherry-picked "gay" as opposed to something like transgenderism, asexuality, pansexuality, or agenderism because "gay" made for a better insult? similar to how nickelback makes for a better insult with regards to music? - aaron
[2018-10-16 14:28:05] - I just find it odd that Handler has so many defenders here for that comment especially since I am positive that, as I've mentioned many times before, this would be front page news for days if it came from Pence's mouth (or somebody similar). -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:27:17] - The weird thing is, I would guess out of most everybody here, I support comedians being able to joke about whatever they want. I think they SHOULD be able to make offensive jokes, and I didn't want to see Colbert fired and I think ABC jumped the gun on Roseanne... -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:25:52] - Daniel: But regardless, I still don't buy that it takes people off the hook. "Hey Hitler, I hear you called in sick today on National Jewish Appreciation day. Maybe making a care package for your grandmother?" Seems a little unseemly, even if we bring Hitler into things. -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:24:41] - Daniel: "Has Trump come out against listening to Nickelback? Tried to make it illegal?" I'm not super up to date with Lindsey Graham's positions, but it sounds like he might not be as anti-gay these days and he was in the past (https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/graham-gop-should-take-gay-marriage-constitutional-amendment-out-platform-n383296). -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:20:26] - a: I think I saw it on twitter. It was one of their trending moments. Some people were upset over her tweets because they saw them as offensive. -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:17:45] - So, yeah, I give it a 10% chance that maybe this was a horrible misunderstanding and that she wasn't being racist or whatever. That's about the same percent chance that I give Handler here that she didn't mean to shame Graham about rumors he is gay. -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:16:54] - For Roseanne's tweet, she tried to defend herself by saying she didn't mean it in a racial way and didn't think about how it would be taken to compare Valerie Jarrett to a monkey. I don't buy it, largely because of her past tweets, but I'll admit that we can't know what was in her mind. -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:16:26] - Paul: Has Trump come out against listening to Nickelback? Tried to make it illegal? Are there well established decades old rumors of him being a Nickelback fan? If all of those then it could be a funny joke and doesn't have to imply that listening to Nickelback is actually bad. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 14:15:01] - aaron: "she just wanted to make a funny tweet to raise awareness of national coming out day" And her past comments don't change your mind on that? -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:12:23] - Daniel: No, the implication is clearly that listening to Nickelback is something he should be ashamed of. Otherwise it's not a joke at all, it's just some random observation that makes no sense. This is especially true if I've made fun of Trump for poor taste in music in the past. -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:11:23] - Daniel: If on National Listen to Music day, I said, "I'll bet Trump is out sick today because he's at home listening to Nickelback". What is the implication? Is the implication that listening to Nickelback is a perfectly fine thing that there is nothing wrong with? -Paul
[2018-10-16 14:10:07] - Daniel: It's not the exact words she used, but it's basically what she said. Where is the joke or humor in simply saying somebody is gay? I don't see how it is a joke unless there is something undesirable about what she is accusing Graham of. -Paul
[2018-10-16 13:18:45] - let me push this a different direction. why should i care about handler? she has a show on "E!"? that's like . . . having a show on "Own" or something. i'm not sure why i should care about whether her statements are benign or horrendous. worded differently, paul, why did you even see this tweet? ~a
[2018-10-16 12:42:35] - i don't think she wrote her tweet thinking, "i hate lindsay graham, how can i really rip him a new one... oh it's national coming out day! that's a good coincidence, this will be a perfect insult". of course we can't see inside her head, but it's much more likely the other way around, that she just wanted to make a funny tweet to raise awareness of national coming out day - aaron
[2018-10-16 12:40:49] - i think the tweet was intended to call attention to national coming out day and then to connect a dot to a random thing associated with being gay. if Guardians 3 had just been released and Rocket Raccoon was gay, she'd might have tied that in instead. the humor wasn't about picking on someone - aaron
[2018-10-16 12:39:10] - paul: alternate tweet, "if anybody's wondering why republicans are calling in sick, Farming Simulator 2018 just released today! Looking at you Lindsay Graham." obviously the tweeter wants to call attention to farming simulator 2018, and did some dot connecting to a political figure known for playing farming games - aaron
[2018-10-16 12:24:35] - "I think Lindsey Graham might be gay" isn't a joke and also isn't what she said? I don't understand. I'm confused. Again paraphrasing but her tweet was "If you are wondering why R's you know aren't at work its because its Coming Out Day. I wonder if thats why Graham isn't at work". I honestly am failing to read that as translating to "I think Graham is gay and that is bad." -Daniel
[2018-10-16 12:04:39] - Daniel: "Make a joke? Maybe make fun of him?" Right, and what is the joke? Or how is she making fun of him? What's funny about saying, "I think Lindsey Graham might be gay"? I don't see anything funny about that unless you intend to imply something is wrong about being gay. -Paul
[2018-10-16 12:01:44] - maybe make fun of him for not coming to work on that specific day which is funny given the rumors. i don't read it as make fun of him because he is or might be gay. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 12:00:58] - Paul: Make a joke? Maybe make fun of him? Point out the humor that there are rumors of him being gay and not at work. Why do you think she tweeted? -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:59:18] - Daniel: Okay, let me ask you this: Why did Handler tweet about Graham not being at work on coming out day? What was her goal there? What do you think she was trying to accomplish? -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:48:57] - I'm still confused what Handler said was bad about being gay. If she said man if only Graham wasn't gay he would be man enough to stand up to trump! That would probably be offensive. But she said paraphrased - "why are you a coward? Is it because he has a gay blackmail tape of you?" The gay there isn't the insult. She is more crude / hostile sure but I still don't see where being gay is the insult -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:46:27] - Paul: I dont think Pence encouraging Booker to come out if he is gay is inherently offensive? Is it supposed to be? I guess it could be if he did it in some weird way or said something offensive as part of it? -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:44:40] - mig: I'm not I understand the relevance of the DC council guy. Was he given the benefit of the doubt? He sounds kind of dumb and it seems people called him out on being dumb? -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:40:00] - Daniel: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/29/cory-booker-gay-or-nay/2726237/ And I chose Cory Booker (misspelled his name first time) because he also has had rumors of being gay swirl about him. -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:39:58] - paul: I'm sure he'll be given as much benefit of the doubt as a democratic DC council member who rants about jews controlling the weather and the federal government, i'm sure. - mig
[2018-10-16 11:39:16] - Daniel: I guess the most shocking thing to me is that you would be okay if the shoe was on the other foot. That is where I have trouble thinking it's not mental gymnastics. I thought everybody here would agree that if Pence was saying Corey Booker should come out on coming out day, it would be offensive. -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:37:51] - Daniel: It's like, if Trump said something mildly insensitive about Mexicans and I was like, "Well, maybe it was a slip of the tongue and I don't think he really meant to insult them".... It might be okay to give him the benefit of the doubt in a vacuum, but considering his history, I think that ship has sailed. -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:37:29] - daniel: strongly disagree. In my eyes, the fact there's been rumors floating about Graham makes it worse in my eyes. I don't really get it. So people have rumor mongered about Graham's sexuality before, so it's now OK to keep doing it? - mig
[2018-10-16 11:36:42] - Daniel: I don't know if it's mental gymnastics or not. I can kinda see how each step of the way what you're saying makes sense, but I think looking at the totally of the situation makes it clear: Handler dislikes Graham. She was trying to insult him. She was using being gay as an insult. -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:25:28] - but hard to accurately judge internal bias I guess. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:25:08] - For the record I don't think I have any inherent bias to defend Handler either. I'm not sure I like her as a person or a comedian much so I don't think its like people when Cosby first accused and their response was no not cosby! -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:23:55] - Paul: I don't feel like I'm doing mental gymnastics or anything here either. Do you think I am? In the first tweet I don't read any real insult other than the same possible idea that he is afraid to come out? The second is more angry/insulting hence the swearing but I still don't think its homophobic. Do you read it as homophobic? If so I guess can you tell me why? -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:17:28] - Paul: I don't think in either of her tweets she was using him being gay as an insult. No. In the first making a joke about that fact that he might be gay and not coming to work on Coming out Day. No insult. 2nd - insulting but not for being gay. For being in theory a coward and sucking up to trump. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:15:58] - Or I guess the second would be offesive on the general don't swear in public I don't want my first grader seeing those words kind of offensive. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:15:49] - Daniel: I don't think being gay is an insult. I assume you don't either. That doesn't change how she meant it, though, right? -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:15:14] - Daniel: "What is the insult? That he is gay?" Yes. I don't know her views either, but it seems abundantly clear to me that she intends her statements to be insults. Why else would she say them? How can "dick sucking" be interpreted as anything else? Seriously, I am asking you, what did she mean by her comments if not an insult? -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:15:06] - Yeah I would buy that she doesn't like Graham. And does insult him. I don't know that I would defend those as good. Just that I don't read homophobic anything from her tweets. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:14:08] - a: Yeah I more meant the original tweet. I think the other one is definitely more crude and is more in the vein of like "hey asshole" type thing. I think the overall tone is insulting but again I'm not sure its offensive. I don't think being gay is the bad part of the message. Its that he is sucking up to trump because they are blackmailing him. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:10:37] - daniel: "Hey, Lindsey Graham what kind of dick sucking video do they have on you for you to be acting like this?" i'm surprised you don't see this as *meant* as an insult. whether or not it should be taken as an insult: hell, i definitely agree with you there, but i think handler is a horrible person. change "dick sucking" to "cunt licking" (now heterosexual): still meant as an insult (but maybe shouldn't be taken as one). ~a
[2018-10-16 11:04:53] - So I guess if you think being called gay is an insult then I guess I could see it but like if someone came up to me and said "your hair is brown! BOOM! I just insulted you!" I would just be confused and continue on. If I tried to pretend I didn't have brown hair and stayed home on National Brown Hair Pride day and someone tweeted about me staying home on that day, it could be a funny joke. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:03:21] - Paul: What is the insult? That he is gay? Is there some other insult I'm missing? I honestly have no idea on Handler's views on being gay. Maybe she thinks its an insult? I don't know. However I don't see an insult because implying he's gay doesn't seem insulting to me. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 11:00:31] - Daniel: https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2018/01/chelsea-handler-accuses-lindsey-graham-dick-sucking And as Miguel mentioned, Handler has a history of this. It's like her go-to insult for Graham. -Paul
[2018-10-16 11:00:05] - Daniel: And I don't see how this can be anything but an attempt at an insult. Do people just randomly go around publicly on twitter speculating that somebody that they don't like might be gay for.... I don't even know what the non-insult reason would be. -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:57:09] - Daniel: "She isn't throwing a rumor out there?" She.... isn't? I think that's exactly what she is doing. The most charitable interpretation of what she is doing is that she is throwing a rumor out there. What part of that statement is wrong? -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:52:55] - Side note: "I guess maybe" is a phrase that gets tossed around but I think Andrea would not approve of. Seems very wishy washy. I think we use it to try signify starting to come around on some position but still feels like we could all be more clear in our sentences
-Daniel[2018-10-16 10:49:39] - Paul: I guess maybe if you think she is originating the rumor that would be worse. But I think she is referencing an established well known rumor and the fact that he isn't at work on the specific day. So not really adding anything new, just pointing out the humor of the juxtaposition of those ideas. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 10:48:11] - Just did a quick search and there is stuff about him being called gay at least as far back as 2010. Again I don't know that she is being nice but I'm not sure she is being offensive? -Daniel
[2018-10-16 10:46:50] - Paul: She isn't throwing a rumor out there? There have been rumors about Graham for a long time. He's denied them and for the most part everyone has moved on. So I think the joke is the existing rumor combined with not being at work. I still don't think she is making fun of him for being gay. Where did she insult him? Again I think is Aaron's point, he might view being called gay an insult but it isn't and shouldn't be. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 10:41:35] - Daniel: Wow, okay. I guess I'm shocked. Almost to the point where I figure I must be missing something. Maybe it's that Handler is trying to make fun of Graham with her tweet? Obviously it's not inherently offensive to speculate if somebody is gay or not, but to throw a rumor out there in order to insult somebody seems pretty offensive. -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:37:25] - I guess I get that it might be mean. Poking fun at someone who is potentially still in the closest probably isn't nice. But I don't think she if making fun of him because he is gay so I'm not sure if its offensive? I guess then I'm making "mean" and "offensive" separate things which is maybe weird. Like I can call someone a jerk without that being offensive to other people but still mean to that person. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 10:34:19] - Paul: Again - its not whether he is gay or not that is the joke. Its the combination of the idea of him being gay and not being at work that day. Yeah I don't see it as homophobic or implying that being gay is bad or any of that. I don't think I would get mad at Trump for saying the same thing either? Its a tricky hypothetical at this point though or think of an analogy for me. -Daniel
[2018-10-16 10:28:47] - aaron: I say "yes it's mean" because the remarks are made in mean spiritedness. - mig
[2018-10-16 10:28:24] - aaron: There's little doubt in my mind that the front page of CNN would be all about how Trump is homophobic and his comments were so offensive to the LGBTA community and whatnot. -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:27:32] - aaron: I go back to my question of: If Donald Trump (or Mike Pence or *insert most hated Republican figure here*) said the exact same thing about Chuck Schumer.... wouldn't everybody be up in arms about how offensive it is? -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:26:23] - aaron: Sure, I get your point and I even agree to a certain extent. Culturally, we're in a weird place where if you make that joke about 99% of things, it's completely non-offensive, but if you make the joke about somebody being gay (or, I dunno, secretly Jewish or some other things probably), then it suddenly becomes a problem. -Paul
[2018-10-16 10:23:50] - but i think one possible explanation is that a lot of our brains are sort of conditioned to think things like "gay=bad" "straight=good" (myself included, weirdly enough) even if we acknowledge those thoughts as irrational and try really, really hard to suppress them. it's still a gut reaction, "she said he might be gay? hey that's mean!!" - aaron
[2018-10-16 10:20:46] - https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ this might be a good time to mention the implicit association test in case anybody skipped it the first time, because i think it's a cool test. and it's one possible explanation why so many people's (including my own) first gut reaction to "he's probably gay" is "hey! that's mean" - aaron
[2018-10-16 10:15:22] - if you rewrite her tweet as "I hate Lindsay Graham, I bet he plays a lot of World Of Warcraft," yeah that has totally different implications but that's not what she said - aaron
[2018-10-16 10:14:22] - the only context in which her statement is offensive, is if you think there's something inherently offensive about being gay. it's a funny tweet even if you just think she's pointing out that there's a republican who plays a lot of World Of Warcraft. the humor doesn't hinge on homosexuality being a bad thing - aaron
[2018-10-16 10:13:19] - if you change her tweet to something like, "it's because BlizzCon is this weekend (looking at you LindsayGraham)" or "it's because of the superbowl (looking at you LindsayGraham)" do you think that implies something negative about World Of Warcraft or the NFL? - aaron
[2018-10-16 09:56:14] - Daniel: I'll grant you that it's probably not technically "homophobic", but that seems to be the word we use as a society when somebody says something perceived as anti-gay, so I went with it. -Paul
[2018-10-16 09:55:35] - Daniel: You don't see anything wrong with somebody making fun of somebody else by implying they're gay? It's perfectly fine for me to say: "I hate Joe. I bet he likes to wear purple on weekends, if you know what I mean"? -Paul
[2018-10-16 00:49:25] - Paul: I don't get whats homophobic about her joke at all. Like 0%. I think she is making fun of that idea that he might be homophobic and also homosexual. Not for him possibly being homosexual. -Daniel
[2018-10-15 23:33:56] - "Chelsea Handler's jokes can't be homophobic because she's on our team". -Paul
[2018-10-15 23:32:48] - aaron: Maybe stereotype is the wrong word (although I don't see any reason why it can't be applied to groups that people self select into). I still think it's a bad assumption, though, and it's just being used as justification by people who want to give the benefit of the doubt to their group and not "the enemy". -Paul
[2018-10-15 23:30:48] - a: Ah, okay. Sounds like I misunderstood APY. Didn't realize it was already normalized (for lack of a better term) per month. Thanks! -Paul
[2018-10-15 17:19:51] - i wouldn't call it a stereotype that democrats voted for obama, or that democrats are in favor of gun control... and yeah i'm sure there are democrats who don't fall in either of those categories too, so in some cases it's a false assumption, but it's not a stereotype - aaron
[2018-10-15 16:57:08] - While some stereotypes are unfair, I think if someone self selects into a political ideology that embraces homophobia and "pro-family" initiatives, it's not really a stereotype at that point... It's just a definition of their political ideology - aaron
[2018-10-15 16:57:07] - worded differently, 2.6% APY is 0.21% MPY (monthly) and 2.75% APY is 0.23% MPY (monthly). as you can see, the MPY for the larger APY is larger. but that will always be the case without converting. ~a
[2018-10-15 16:51:50] - i think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem. APY is already giving you the bang per month (really per year, but converting it to per month is effectively the same comparison). what you want to know, is what does the loan give you *per unit time*. which is what APY already does! 2.75 is *definitely* the better loan *per month* (or per any anything) for sure assuming you are ok tying your money up for 15 months. ~a
[2018-10-15 16:25:09] - I assume the 9 month one is better, but I'm not sure how to prove it mathematically. -Paul
prev <-> next