Political Discussion

GritNGlitter said:
This is tragic. Truly. What adult talks this way?
Click to expand...

One who absolutely spends way too much time online. Also one who is engaging with somebody who just wants a fight and while I don’t really want to I hate to disappoint so I’m just trying to keep him at arms length. You just co-signed all his posts with likes so I guess you don’t have much of a problem with it either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Hey man. From my point of view, what I did was say "welcome back," post a couple of goofs about nuclear power, and then tease you a little about who I thought you were. In return, you lost your shit.

Despite knowing that we crossed swords a few times in the old forum (the "years of antipathy" I guess?), I thought things were somewhat amicable between us since. In fact, out of curiosity I just did a search on every post I've ever written that tagged you, and not one was hostile or adversarial in any way whatsoever. To the contrary, several of them were pretty complimentary. In the last three and a half years, we've laughed at each other's jokes, had some interesting conversations, and disagreed over strongly held beliefs, and I've respected our boundaries. We've even privately messaged on, if not friendly, at least personable terms. I think this thread, and life in general, benefit from having a foil for a robust exchange of ideas. You have said yourself that if one of us were to meet you in actual life we would probably all get along just fine, and there's a clear example of that in another former member here whose entire life is representative of all the things you think are wrong with our society, and yet she regularly went to bat for you because she had a beer with you and thought you were a decent person. Many people here have said, repeatedly, that they don't agree with you but respect you personally and are interested in your perspective when you share it.

The position here has always been simple: Chuck's a member of this community. A member with a lot of ideas and opinions that don't make sense to us, but hey, it takes all kinds, and when you get past the politics we're all just folks and it's just a music forum after all.

You've repeatedly called the people in this forum crazy, psychotic, abhorrent, evil, repugnant, and more: useless, idiots, liars, fools, and children.

Your whole worldview professes to be about personal responsibility:

But you need admins to step in and close your account because you don't even have the self control to stop telling a bunch of amoral worms who you hate that they're wrong. And then you create another one anyway just to come back and tell us we're wrong again. And WE are the ones who just want to pick fights? Okay.

You have the floor. I'm out.
Click to expand...
Cosigned.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Hey man. From my point of view, what I did was say "welcome back," post a couple of goofs about nuclear power, and then tease you a little about who I thought you were. In return, you lost your shit.

Despite knowing that we crossed swords a few times in the old forum (the "years of antipathy" I guess?), I thought things were somewhat amicable between us since. In fact, out of curiosity I just did a search on every post I've ever written that tagged you, and not one was hostile or adversarial in any way whatsoever. To the contrary, several of them were pretty complimentary. In the last three and a half years, we've laughed at each other's jokes, had some interesting conversations, and disagreed over strongly held beliefs, and I've respected our boundaries. We've even privately messaged on, if not friendly, at least personable terms. I think this thread, and life in general, benefit from having a foil for a robust exchange of ideas. You have said yourself that if one of us were to meet you in actual life we would probably all get along just fine, and there's a clear example of that in another former member here whose entire life is representative of all the things you think are wrong with our society, and yet she regularly went to bat for you because she had a beer with you and thought you were a decent person. Many people here have said, repeatedly, that they don't agree with you but respect you personally and are interested in your perspective when you share it.

The position here has always been simple: Chuck's a member of this community. A member with a lot of ideas and opinions that don't make sense to us, but hey, it takes all kinds, and when you get past the politics we're all just folks and it's just a music forum after all.

You've repeatedly called the people in this forum crazy, psychotic, abhorrent, evil, repugnant, and more: useless, idiots, liars, fools, and children.

Your whole worldview professes to be about personal responsibility:

But you need admins to step in and close your account because you don't even have the self control to stop telling a bunch of amoral worms who you hate that they're wrong. And then you create another one anyway just to come back and tell us we're wrong again. And WE are the ones who just want to pick fights? Okay.

You have the floor. I'm out.
Click to expand...

This doesn't seem very misanthropic.
 
I'll have to do more research about political signs I see in peoples front laws to see what is going on.


But basically the signs are from nurses saying nurses want to keep healthcare within the baystate.

Currently, most of our healthcare system is in the Partners Healthcare Group. Mass General, Bay State and what not fall under Partners.

I would imagine the signs would indicate that an even larger consolidation is on the horizon. But I wonder how this applies to politics and political signs. Is there something voters can do that will have an impact on this?
 
RenegadeMonster said:
I'll have to do more research about political signs I see in peoples front laws to see what is going on.


But basically the signs are from nurses saying nurses want to keep healthcare within the baystate.

Currently, most of our healthcare system is in the Partners Healthcare Group. Mass General, Bay State and what not fall under Partners.

I would imagine the signs would indicate that an even larger consolidation is on the horizon. But I wonder how this applies to politics and political signs. Is there something voters can do that will have an impact on this?
Click to expand...
There isn’t a lot voters can do except write their congress person and ask that they put pressure on the DOJ to not allow the merger to go through due to antitrust laws regarding monopolies/consolidation.
 
epyon415 said:


this seems to give some explanations for nuclear waste management. I still honestly don’t know enough about it all.

My biggest concerns are all about human ineptitude and what might come of it.
Click to expand...

I think there are many things true in this thread, but a few things seem to be painted a little to rosy. First, dry casket storage seems nowhere to be considered as a kong term storage solution, but as an intermediate ( for 30 - 100 years until those get leaky. underground geological storage seems to be the route most countries go for their nuclear waste, but there are basically no such storages in the world, yet.

Second, the described low volume of the high-level nuclear waste as far as I see only takes into account the high-density uranium or Neptunium pellets but there are the rods, too. Even if those are included the caskets add a whole lot of weight ( and volume). I could find it for the german castors and a casket storing 100kg of fuel weighs 100 metric tons.( so a factor of 1000 in weight, probably a lot more in volume.

Recycling of spent fuel seems to be doable ( and is done in a bunch of countries) to reduce waste, but is not without complications and adds high costs
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Hey man. From my point of view, what I did was say "welcome back," post a couple of goofs about nuclear power, and then tease you a little about who I thought you were. In return, you lost your shit.

Despite knowing that we crossed swords a few times in the old forum (the "years of antipathy" I guess?), I thought things were somewhat amicable between us since. In fact, out of curiosity I just did a search on every post I've ever written that tagged you, and not one was hostile or adversarial in any way whatsoever. To the contrary, several of them were pretty complimentary. In the last three and a half years, we've laughed at each other's jokes, had some interesting conversations, and disagreed over strongly held beliefs, and I've respected our boundaries. We've even privately messaged on, if not friendly, at least personable terms. I think this thread, and life in general, benefit from having a foil for a robust exchange of ideas. You have said yourself that if one of us were to meet you in actual life we would probably all get along just fine, and there's a clear example of that in another former member here whose entire life is representative of all the things you think are wrong with our society, and yet she regularly went to bat for you because she had a beer with you and thought you were a decent person. Many people here have said, repeatedly, that they don't agree with you but respect you personally and are interested in your perspective when you share it.

The position here has always been simple: Chuck's a member of this community. A member with a lot of ideas and opinions that don't make sense to us, but hey, it takes all kinds, and when you get past the politics we're all just folks and it's just a music forum after all.

You've repeatedly called the people in this forum crazy, psychotic, abhorrent, evil, repugnant, and more: useless, idiots, liars, fools, and children.

Your whole worldview professes to be about personal responsibility:

But you need admins to step in and close your account because you don't even have the self control to stop telling a bunch of amoral worms who you hate that they're wrong. And then you create another one anyway just to come back and tell us we're wrong again. And WE are the ones who just want to pick fights? Okay.

You have the floor. I'm out.
Click to expand...
I’m not even going to dispute any of the points you made about my personal weakness in dealing with the folks here and how I left. They reflect poorly on me and yet are admittedly reasonably accurate. I’ll own my shit even when it’s really stinky and completely of my own making.

All I can offer is my perspective on how your posts read to me. You knew who I was from my very first post and made sure that I knew it. Every post afterwards didn’t read as a good natured goofs, but as very pointed and directed comments. So I didn’t read things as a “y’all” picking a fight, but you specifically.
 
Jan said:
Recycling of spent fuel seems to be doable ( and is done in a bunch of countries) to reduce waste, but is not without complications and adds high costs
Click to expand...

It does. The next generation of reactors in the coming decades should be able to use the waste from todays conventional reactors as fuel. But they will still produce the high level waste, just at a slightly lower volume. There is some interesting theory around using certain frequencies of high density light to change the composition of the waste and to significantly reduce its half life but even the most enthusiastic and optimistic scientists in that field as predicting that it’s multiple decades away from being a working reality, never mind a scalable one.

Part of me wonders whether micro generation, energy storage and off grid, particularly in rural areas, might be part of the way forward.
 
Lee Newman said:
need more details please. google machine is broken.
Click to expand...
Basically (and I read this earlier and quickly so anyone correct me if I miss finer details), Alex Jones claimed he had no texts related to Sandy Hook on his phone (or something like that). He had given his phone to his lawyer. It did have a bunch of stuff. Evidently, his lawyer accidentally (?) sent two years worth of his messages to the prosecuting attorneys and then did not caveat that it was protected/privileged (attorney-client) data so it was free game for the other team. Then they revealed to Jones on the stand that they had it and asked if he knew what perjury was or some such line of questioning.
 
Oh, I found a Time article:
On Wednesday, Mark Bankston, the attorney for the families, disagreed—and brought receipts. “Did you know that 12 days ago, your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone with every text message you’ve sent for the past two years?” said Bankston. “That is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn’t have text messages about Sandy Hook.”

“No I didn’t know this happened, but I told you I gave the phone over,” Jones responded, clearly shocked. “This is your Perry Mason moment.”

“In discovery, you were asked if you had Sandy Hook text messages on your phone, and you said, ‘No.’ Correct?” Bankston asked. “If I was mistaken, I was mistaken. You’ve got the text messages right there,” responded Jones.

“You know what perjury is, right?” Bankston asked. “Yes I do,” said Jones. “I’m not a tech guy. I told you in my testimony I gave my phone to the lawyers.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top