This week on forum, we embraced the usual "stick it to the man" spiel, with a bit of Chris Brown-free pop culture mixed in.
Funny and absurd
Re: I hate the saxophone
Post by john_titor on Sun Feb 08, 2009 8:08 pm
Sax players make really weird faces when they play. Saxii usually sound like an intestinal disorder in progress. Especially when they do that thing where they make it squawk. Like beating a sack full of geese with a three iron and the geese have those little New Year's Eve horns in their mouths. It was the bad-ass instrument of the 50's You could get chicks with a sax. Richie Cunningham played the sax, need I say more? Which leads us to the next part:
Next time you hear a whip-a-midi ring-tone that makes you say Hmmm.. do not be surprised to see it snatched from an oldster's holster. If the ring-tone is truly the doorway to the psyche, I fear for our retirement villages. And it is not Al Jolson stuff either. You will see.
I do like those big harmonicas, as heard on the Green Acres theme song.
I did not go outside today.
Post by harrissimo on Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:24 pm
Just wait ten years and then listen to M.I.A. We will see if she passes the test of time. I don't think she will pass. But I could be wrong. Of course, to a Vampire Weekend fan, shit through a funnel probably sounds pretty good.
Pay to name someone else's child?
Post by ArturoBandini on Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:26 pm
Since having my own human spawn would be rather expensive and time consuming, I thought about paying someone else who's already expecting a child to name their future-human an awesome name that I chose.
Would that be ethical? The offer would read like:
"$50 cash for evidence (photocopy of birth certificate) that your new baby is named "Bertrand Russell (+ your surname)". No strings attached."
I checked it out - a legal name change costs about $100, so it would not be in the economic interest of the new parents to immediately change the name back. In exchange for my small investment, a human being now carries with them a small token of certain ideas that I admire.
Thoughts? What would you name another person's child?
Night Of The Joaquin Dead
Post by Mean Scenester on Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:01 pm
Anybody see Joaquin Phoenix on Letterman last night?
He acted like a sullen teen who couldn't be rousted from his nihilistic revery to answer a few boilerplate questions. The gum chewing was a nice touch. And nothing telegraphs "substance abuse" like showing up to a talk show in shades.
I swear, not since the infamous Crispin Glover incident have I seen Letterman so befuddled.
What do you think? PR ploy? Destructive urge to be idolized in death like brother River? Garden variety drug abuse? Just an asshole?
Letterman's best rejoinder: "I'm sorry you couldn't be here tonight."
Smart and sharp
Re: Any heroes on the layoff front?
Post by dogmeat on Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:25 pm
I think it's not fair to assume that even the employers that layoff workers didn't do something worthy of praise. The economic situation is not simple. Some industries are really hurting.
Odd as it may sound, but for some companies in may be in the best interest of employees in the long run to lay them off right now. Companies have debts to pay. If laying off workers means the company can stay in business and then bring those employees back when the economy turns around, then I think the company is worthy of praise. The most important thing right now is that companies survive so there are jobs when demand rebounds. Although I do not extend that sentiment to GM.
Re: "Raise my Taxes"...now we're talkin'
Post by eriedasch on Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:59 pm
Although I agree that the uber rich should be giving up a greater percent of their income for taxes I don't like the idea of some cap of 50% for anyone making $1m. Seems kind of random and ignores a lot of factors (location, work done to earn the money, etc.).
But no matter how much you raise the taxes for the rich, what I wonder is how many of them actually pay what they owe? All the loop poles, tax codes, and mumbo jumbo that the IRS cannot even interpret maybe part of the reason why so many people can get away with tax fraud. At least that is what I would call it.
Based on just a few of Obama's recent appointment considerations and so many tax issues being uncovered in the process leads me to believe this is more the norm than the exception. And it is almost comical they are all so willing to pay the back taxes immediately. Yet if not uncovered due to being considered for an important position this stuff would have never even come up.
Meanwhile, we've got the IRS chasing their tails going after Joe Blow making $50K / year or less auditing him/her because they are the easy prey.
If nothing else WE NEED TAX REFORM and need it in a way to prevent people from avoiding paying their taxes. After that we need some real penalties put in place for those who do. How about a mandatory audit for everyone making $1M or even $10M or higher? How about doubling what they owe on what they failed to pay? Or even charge them an extra 30% as a penalty.
When I was younger I collected unemployment for a couple years during the off-season for a seasonal job. Not sure if it was neglect or just stupidity, but I failed to pay taxes on the unemployment for a couple years. You think I got away with that? Hell no. Something like 5 years later I got a letter from the IRS with a bill and another 30% tacked on for interest I owed. I was not very happy, but paid it and learned to be more careful when it comes to filing taxes. Think the IRS is that careful looking at rich politicians?
Somehow I don't think the rich politicians and others getting away with tax fraud that simply paying their back taxes when informed of their error is going to teach them a lesson or set any kind of example for others doing the same - whether they claim ignorance or not.
And these are just individual income taxes. Don't even get me started on how many big corporations avoid paying taxes. Google "Does Walmart pay taxes" and that should get you started.
Re: Madison Street Names
Post by roadkill bill on Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:11 pm
As is common is many parts on post-WWII America, streets (or sometimes whole developments) are often named after the species or ecosystem that was displaced when the subdivision was built.
Hawks Landing comes to mind.
That's why you see so many areas and streets called Meadow, Woods, Ridge, Grove, etc.
Another common theme is the Native Americans that we threw out: Sauk Creek Blackhawk Winnebago
Re: Stimulus Passes Senate
Post by Stella_Guru on Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:52 pm
Obama was elected by the first anti-war constituency since Eisenhower, but he is going to announce an escalation in the Afghan War shortly. The U.S. spends more on our military than the next 16 countries combined. Military recruitment is surging. Ending our dependence on war and instead building a peace-based economy would backup Obama's vision of change with economic reality. Steps we could take?
1. Scale out arms dealing and make it illegal by 2012.
2. Write into every defense contract a requirement for a peacetime project.
3. Subsidize conversion of military contractors to peaceful technologies.
4. Convert military bases to housing for the poor.
5. Phase out all foreign military bases.
6. Require all military personnel to devote time to rebuilding infrastructure.
7. Call a moratorium on future weapons technologies.
8. Reduce armaments that have no use against terrorism and were intended to defend against an enemy that no longer exists.
9. Fully fund social services and take the balance of the funding out of the defense and homeland security budgets.
10. Get rid of the Patriot Act.
Re: Digital television transition possibly delayed...
Post by ConstantTraveler on Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:21 pm
Wallrock, you're dead on. People forget that stations are basically paying double in terms of maintenance and electricty to keep the two signals running. So why would a station, as it starts to budget for future quarters, even think about having to pay those extra costs?
I don't know if people realize it, but all the local stations are cash strapped in a big way. If it seems like that reporter, anchor, radio traffic reporter, DJ isn't there anymore in the past couple months, it's because of the economy. The DTV switch was one way that stations could finally find a way to save money without it affecting their employees.
As for the consumers, as has been pointed out by many, people had years upon years to get ready. More importantly... delaying the switch would at best, annoy people for another 4 months with the endless DTV deadline promos, at worst it would confuse people...
At 100 days before Feb 17, everyone started countdowns about x-number of days before the switch. Then when there were about 10 days left... "Oh, you know what, forget about that countdown, we've been messing with your head... it's actually another 120 or so days away."
And yes, the initial legislation on this was during the Clinton Administration. People looking to blame Republicans on this one are barking up the wrong tree. Not looking for a political flamewar here, but I do believe in accuracy.
This isn't a case of media not being kind to the consumer. By in large, media educated the public, and the vast vast majority of consumers responded.
And don't forget, even in the bill Obama signed for the June 12th deadline, it gives stations the option to switch earlier if they want. So it's not like these stations are defying the wishes of the President. They're following the letter of the law. If the President and Congress wanted to postpone everyone until June 12, then they should have written it that way. They allowed these exceptions, probably because they understood all the considerations from above.