Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Frumple

Pages: 1 ... 1814 1815 [1816] 1817 1818 ... 1929
27226
Pay for something over time with cash instead of credit, basically. I think.  Wiki.

It's happened a bit in Florida, too, apparently.

27227
Other Games / Re: Co-op RPG games
« on: December 23, 2011, 09:39:53 pm »
TomeNET :P

There's also MUDs and suchlike.

27228
General Discussion / Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« on: December 23, 2011, 04:20:56 pm »
Probably not. There are a limited number of students to service. There are a limited number of qualified teachers. Particularly ones willing to work in dangerous conditions for poor pay. Education isn't a problem that can be solved just by throwing bodies at it.
Maybe not bodies, but money would likely help, and th'USA's education systems are in a lot worse shape than their military (Best military in the world vs. not the best education.). That poor pay bit could be countered a little, if nothing else. More qualified teachers, too! We've also got freakish dropout rates in some areas, so, yanno', could probably be saving on some of those serviceable students. If teachers and staff had the funding to do some more extra, here and there.

I would also note that schools are typically funded at the state level by property taxes. And it is the the property value collapse primarily responsible for bleeding states and education dry, and that has nothing to do with the federal military budget.
Point being that some of that military funding could be shifted elsewhere. Just to help out, yanno'? Education funding going lower may have nothing to do with the military budget, but some of said budget could help arrest or slow the education drop.

I'm not against education at all, but you guys are making bad arguments.
Not even trying to give a properly statistically backed up one, at all, just giving some (really damn rough) numbers to kinda' put forth a more 'on the ground' picture of what some of that freakishly massive military budget could be doing instead. Points I'm putting forth aren't as solid as they could be, no, not at all, but even a bad argument can get a point across.

I don't think 'military could afford to get a little less money, schools could really use that stuff' is a bad argument, though.

27229
General Discussion / Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« on: December 23, 2011, 03:46:20 pm »
 ::)

Rough numbers are rough, but seriously, it should get the bloody idea across. Also note that what I said used instead. Fund several dozen schools or hire 75k teachers.

Some numbers from federal funding to charter schools I picked up recent was 6k a head for students (in south florida), which, yeah, is about 180k for 30 kids. That extra 3-4 billion wouldn't be supplanting current funding, but adding to it.

Basically, let me put it this way. It doesn't cost 100 million to run a single school for a year*; including teachers salaries, maintenance of all sorts. 4 billion would run more than 400 schools. I think that would be worthwhile, given that it would reduce the military budget by under a percent.

I have trouble hammering that part hard enough, I think. Under a percent. Less than 1/100th of the military budget. In exchange, over 400 schools fully funded.

E: Just to re-emphasize, this while the US is facing an almost endemic education problem and almost every damn thing I hear from any teacher or person working administration in public schools is about running into budgeting issues. The US has an education problem. It's also the preeminent military power in the world. I could see giving a (massively g'damn) little from the latter to help with the former a bit.

*The 6k per student, assuming full funding, is 12 million for a 2000 student school.

27230
General Discussion / Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« on: December 23, 2011, 03:20:01 pm »
[...]its budget of $533.8 billion[...]

Honestly, this is the kind of thing I see when I think of military spending in the US. We could toss, say, three or four billion (Less than one percent of the total budget) into, I'unno, the g'damn schools, which are suffering budget cuts almost across the board, nation wide. I somehow doubt shifting <1% of military funding into education or infrastructure is somehow going to cause the US to fall from our position of absolute military power in the world.

Meanwhile, that three or four billion could fund several dozen (at the absolute least; I'm pretty damn sure the number is considerably higher, but I haven't checked the average operating cost of a public school lately, so I'm going for almost farcically conservative.) schools. Giving rough numbers (40k year salary, which is high in some areas), it could hire 75,000 teachers instead. Given class sizes nowadays (Saying 30, which is sickeningly normal and occasionally low), that'd give us teachers for >2 million students. So less than a percent from military to teach fairly close to the same percentage of the USA's total frakking population.

I'unno about other folks, but that sounds like a damn good deal, to me.

27231
It was very clearly a hate crime, yeah, and the fellow got convicted for a hate crime. So there's that, ayuh.

27232
On one paw, awesome.

On the other, I see why owls are vicious predators more clearly, now.

27233
And if we compare an occupied house with an occupied church, or two empty ones?
Would depend on how the church was being used. Church is still a church if 'occupied' just means 'there's a dude squatting in it'. Some folks convert churches into homes, business buildings, etc. Church is a style of building as much, if not more, than a function of one. Also what you mean by 'empty'; in the sense that there's no one there right now, or in the sense of an abandoned building. Former, in that case, would be worse than the latter.

Beyond that, depends on how much the building cost. Churches usually cost more to construct than your average house (Which smacks of either hypocrisy or heresy for some religions, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.). From a strictly material point of view, you're usually doing more damage wrecking the former.

Then, it'd depend on whose house it was. Burning down the dalai lama's place of residence would be different from burning down, say, mine, as an example. It would also probably be worse than burning down some number of churches-of-equal-occupancy-status. The same might be said for a particularly effective doctor or scientist, depending on their accomplishments.

Last part, I guess, would be the status of the church. There's (active) ones in my area that a significant portion of the population would cheer from being burned down. They can be as much a source of dissension and strife as community building, sometimes. You'd probably not value a widely reviled church as much as a widely appreciated one (Though it depends on the reasons for each, of course. Hence the probably :P).

Multi-variant situation! The answer is 'depends' ;)

I'm not sure why we're ranking crimes at the moment, other than explaining why burning a church is different than burning other buildings.
Because it's fun! The original burning subject didn't even have anything substantial to do with the building being a church, really. Community center would have had the same effect (possibly more) in some areas.

27234
General Discussion / Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« on: December 22, 2011, 09:53:49 pm »
Slavery, friend. Call an apple an apple.

Slavery approached a good idea when a trained worker wasn't head and shoulders more productive than a untrained one, with similar statement for motivated vs unmotivated workers. That time is not this time. Now it's just a waste of resources you could be investing in better automation and a smaller number of well trained, loyal, motivated workers. Workers which you don't get if you've broken them down into debt slaves :-\

Most of it's just (put scare quotes around that just) a matter of long-term blindness. Neurotic bastids can only see short term profit, and damn the guns regarding everything else. It's not exactly a surprise that particular plan of action goes riiight down the shitter.

27235
I has a bucket of tea.
* The Merchant Of Menace sips.
This is awesome

Bucket? I've done tupperware bowls, but never buckets.

... full five gal, or something smaller?

27236
Attacking the church is symbolically and literally attacking the community as a whole. It destroys the central social gathering place, the symbol of a people culture and causes harm to all its members. Its "churchiness" does make it more reprehensible an act than burning an empty warehouse or an individuals home.

Well, when the church actually represents that for a particular community, anyway. It's... not that clear cut, nowadays. Especially when areas where there's a... saturation, I guess, of churches. There's five or six within a 10 minute drive of my house. Maybe double that if you drive another 15 min. And that's only of the same religion :-\ That kind of situation isn't uncommon in parts of the US, especially the less populated areas.

Intent would definitely be what would influence my reaction toward the arsonist, I guess. In this case, it was racism more than anything else. Symbolic (but perhaps not literal, or at least literal only regarding a subset of the community) attack on a social group, yeah. Hitting a school or valued non-Caucasian community member would be just as reprehensible (to me).

Of course, my most honest urge toward racists in general would be to burn every damn one of them until they stop breeding, but I obviously can't act on that. Logistics, at the very least, to say nothing of the legal or moral aspects. Some day, all those bastards will die. Might not be until the rest of the species does, but at least I'll be able to take that bright note with me. Though that's tiredness and ever simmering frustration (I live in/around a g'damn nest of bigots, and their shit wears on me.), not rational faculty (Which condemns bigotry in general as either hypocrisy or heresy, depending on the source. Re: Christianity, at least, intolerance/bigotry, at all, is a direct violation of the teachings of Jesus and sin against their deity.) :-\ [/rant], I guess.

27237
Jr. Don't forget the Junior :P

S'one of those minor neat things, I actually had a teacher (WWII vet, taught philosophy of history) that shared a class (German, iirc) with MLK. Teach remembered being blown out of the water by King, grade wise :P

27238
Other Games / Re: Dota 2
« on: December 22, 2011, 08:24:31 pm »
He could do that, yeah, but if you were up against anyone even remotely competent, the chances of being able to farm up to that point without being constantly ganked was basically zero.

Kinda' like the permastun troll warlord. Yeah, it was a thing that could happen, but only if the other side was genuinely terrible.

27239
... last century, yeah. It was. Not very common nowadays, though. Maybe every second or third year you'll hear something about it happening.

27240
A cat is quite frankly useless as a utilitarian societal input.
Point of order, this premise is flawed :P

Cats are both good for vermin killers and have documented benefits for health, if you're not allergic. Cats purring is good for you.

Though I guess if you were going that route, cats are to churches what mousetraps are to, I'unno, City Hall or something of similar nature. *vague shrug*

Though that doesn't really invalidate the rest of the argument, I guess.

Pages: 1 ... 1814 1815 [1816] 1817 1818 ... 1929