"If you’re gonna go find her, I’ll go with you."
"I can go alone…"
What is this and why have i not seen it????
Yh what is this
Where is this from?
The lie is over now.
The truth is out.
Its time to wake up and accept the fact that the people on the top, don’t have your best interest in mind. All they ever wanted, want and will want is money over your and your children’s dead body. Its Eugenics. Nothing new.
Wake up and Care and Share before too late.
you people are the reason why measles are back in new york
If measile is back, then it should only affect those who aren’t vaccinated. But is affecting those who are. THINK.
Vaccination doesn’t work, and even if it did… it only protects for couple years max.
Don’t seek vaccination … but nutrition my friend. Nutrition is the true medicine.
vaccines are bullshit and cause adverse reactions like death
where is your proof
hOLY FRICK YOU DONE PISSED ME OFF AND I DON’T GET MAD EASILY SO CONGRATS
SIT YOUR IGNORANT FEARMONGERING SELF DOWN AND LISTEN UP BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA BE LONG
THE HUMAN IMMUNE SYSTEM IS MADE OF TWO PARTS: THE INNATE SYSTEM AND THE ADAPTIVE SYSTEM. YOU NEED BOTH WORKING TOGETHER TO PROTECT YOU FROM DISEASES, BUT THE ADAPTIVE SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO ONLY PROTECT YOU FROM THINGS IT’S ALREADY EXPERIENCED. IT CAN TAKE UP TO TWO WEEKS TO KICK IN AGAINST AN INFECTION IT’S NEVER SEEN BEFORE, AND GUESS WHAT FARTNUGGET YOU CAN BE DEAD OR SCREWED OVER FOR LIFE IN TWO WEEKS. BUT WHEN IT SEES A DISEASE IT CREATES MEMORY CELLS THAT REMEMBER THAT DISEASE AND CAN KICK IN IMMEDIATELY WHEN IT HAPPENS AGAIN, USUALLY QUICK ENOUGH TO PREVENT YOU FROM GETTING SICK AT ALL.
THE POINT OF VACCINES IS TO USE A NATURAL BODY RESPONSE TO PROTECT PEOPLE BY HELPING IT DO WHAT IT DOES ALREADY. YOU USE ATTENUATED NONVIRULENT FORMS OF THE DISEASE TO PREP THE IMMUNE SYSTEM SO IT WILL REMEMBER HOW TO RECOGNIZE AND FIGHT THAT DISEASE IN THE FUTURE. THAT IS HOW YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM WORKS SO DON’T YOU DARE START CLAIMING THAT YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM MEANS YOU DON’T NEED VACCINATIONS. THAT’S THE ENTIRE POINT. YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM CAN’T DO IT ALONE. THAT’S WHY SMALLPOX KILLED 500 MILLION PEOPLE BEFORE VACCINATIONS STOPPED IT.
VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM HOLY FRICK THERE HAS NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE BEEN PROOF OF THAT AND I CHALLENGE YOU TO SHOW ME SOME. THERE WAS ONE DOCTOR WHO PUBLISHED A STUDY IN 1998 SHOWING VACCINES MIGHT CAUSE AUTISM. IT WAS FAKE AND PROVED WRONG OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT HE USED UNETHICAL AND INVASIVE PROCEDURES ON CHILDREN AND HE WAS BANNED FROM PRACTICING MEDICINE.
THE DIAGNOSIS OF AUTISM HAS IMPROVED SINCE 1970. CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION. YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE HAS INCREASED SINCE 1970? INTERNET USAGE. MAYBE THE INTERNET CAUSES AUTISM, IF YOU’RE GONNA USE THAT LOGIC.
AND HOLY FRICKING HECK EVEN IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE LIE THAT VACCINES ARE LINKED TO AUTISM, ARE YOU REALLY THAT SCARED OF AUTISM THAT YOU’D RATHER YOUR CHILD DIE HORRIBLY OF A COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE DISEASE THAN BE AUTISTIC
THIOMERSAL IS AN ORGANIC MERCURY-CONTAINING COMPOUND THAT WAS USED AS A PRESERVATIVE IN VACCINES IN CONTROLLED AMOUNTS BECAUSE GUESS WHAT DOUCHECANOE EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD IS CHEMICALS AND THESE GUYS ARE PAID TO KNOW HOW TO COMBINE THEM PROPERLY. IT WAS NEVER SHOWN TO CAUSE AUTISM AND THE SIGNS OF MERCURY POISONING ARE WELL-KNOWN AND NOTHING LIKE WHAT PEOPLE ARE CLAIMING VACCINES DO. EVEN SO, IT WAS PHASED OUT OF VACCINES IN 2001. THE ONLY ONE THAT EVER STILL USES IT IS THE INFLUENZA VACCINE AND GUESS WHAT? AFTER A CRAPTON OF TESTS DONE BY PEOPLE SMARTER THAN YOU WHO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY’RE DOING AND HOW CHEMISTRY AND MEDICINE WORK, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ONLY SIDE EFFECT WAS- WAIT FOR IT- SLIGHT REDNESS AT THE INJECTION SITE.BECAUSE AGAIN, THIOMERSAL IS NOT PURE MERCURY YOU ABSOLUTE TURDSTAIN AND IS NOT THE LEAST BIT COMPARABLE TO TOXIC WASTE. AND DO YOU EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH 25 MICROGRAMS IS? THAT’S 0.000025 GRAMS. GRAMS. THAT IS AN ABSURDLY SMALL AMOUNT. I CAN’T EVEN CONVEY HOW SMALL THAT IS. PROBABLY THE SIZE OF YOUR BRAIN.
IM NOT TOUCHING THE BILL GATES THING BECAUSE I DONT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT IT. SOMEONE ELSE CAN DO THAT FOR ME. OR YANNO YOU COULD GOOGLE IT AND ACTUALLY EDUCATE YOURSELF FROM OBJECTIVE SOURCES AND NOT SOURCELESS FEARMONGERING JPEGS REPOSTED SO MANY TIMES THEY’RE ALMOST COMPLETELY ILLEGIBLE.
HEEYYYYYY GUESS WHAT ALL THE FOOD IN THE WORLD WON’T HELP YOU IF YOU’RE THROWING IT UP OR CRAPPING IT OUT OR IF SOMETHING COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO FOOD IS KILLING YOU FROM THE INSIDE OUT. YEAH MAN PEOPLE NEED FOOD AND WE SHOULD HELP MORE WITH THAT BUT YOU ALSO GOTTA PRIORITIZE THINGS THAT KILL SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY THAN STARVATION.
YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY THAT WE’VE GOT ALL THESE VACCINES NOW. PEOPLE WHO LIVED IN THE 1700’S WOULD BE CRYING TEARS OF JOY IF THEY HEARD THAT WE HAD WIPED OUT SMALLPOX AND POLIO AND WE COULD PREVENT ALL THESE OTHER DISEASES. LOOK AT THAT LIST. THAT’S NOT A LIST OF POISONS. THAT’S A LIST OF THE DISEASES WHOSE BUTTS WE’VE KICKED AND THAT DESERVES THE BIGGEST HELL YEAH IN THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE.
EXCEPT NOW MORONS LIKE YOU ARE BRINGING THEM BACK. YOUR BIT OF NON-LOGIC THERE JUST PROVES HOW LITTLE YOU UNDERSTAND THIS. THERE’S A THING CALLED HERD IMMUNITY AND IT’S JUST AS IMPORTANT, IF NOT MORESO, THAN INDIVIDUAL IMMUNITY. SOME PEOPLE CAN’T GET VACCINES DUE TO HEALTH ISSUES. WE’RE PROTECTING THEM TOO WHEN EVERYONE ELSE DOES BECAUSE IT CAN’T SPREAD. BUT LET’S TALK ABOUT HEALTHY PEOPLE, SINCE THAT’S WHAT YOU’RE ASKING ABOUT. DO YOU KNOW HOW FAST DISEASES MUTATE? WITHIN LESS THAN FIVE YEARS FOR SOME. AND IT’S CAUSED BY A THING CALLED SELECTIVE PRESSURE. SELECTIVE PRESSURE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GET A TWO WEEK DOSE OF ANTIBIOTICS AND ONLY TAKE TEN DAYS’ WORTH BECAUSE YOU FEEL BETTER AND YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THOSE SILLY DOCTORS. WELL GUESS WHAT? YOU DIDN’T KILL ALL THE BACTERIA AND NOW THEY’RE FREE TO GROW AGAIN. AND SINCE THEY’RE THE ONES THAT SURVIVED, THEY’RE NOW IMMUNE TO THE ANTIBIOTICS AND FREE TO SPREAD THAT TO OTHERS. CONGRATS BUTTMUNCH YOU JUST RUINED IT FOR EVERYONE BECAUSE NOW IT’S MUTATED AND SPREADING AGAIN AND THE ANTIBIOTICS DON’T WORK. THE SAME THING HAPPENS WITH VACCINES. IF PEOPLE LIKE YOU KEEP AVOIDING VACCINES, IT GIVES DISEASES LIKE MEASLES A TOEHOLD IN THE POPULATION TO MUTATE AND SPREAD AND CAUSE ANOTHER EPIDEMIC
VACCINES DON’T WEAR OFF AFTER FIVE YEARS I DON’T KNOW WHERE YOU’RE GETTING THAT INFORMATION BUT HOLY JEEZ IT’S JUST PLAIN WRONG. THE CLOSEST THING I FOUND ON GOOGLE WAS SOME CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE HPV VACCINE LASTING 6-9 YEARS AND EVEN THAT WAS UNDER SCRUTINY AND NOT EVERY DISEASE WORKS THE SAME WAY. SOME ARE FOREVER, SOME REQUIRE BOOSTERS, ETC ETC. I COULD GET INTO WHY BUT THIS HAS GOTTEN LONG ENOUGH SO LET’S BRING IT BACK TO PEOPLE SMARTER THAN YOU HAVE STUDIED THIS AND BUILT ON CENTURIES OF MEDICAL PROCESS AND THIS IS WHAT THEY DO FOR A LIVING SO I THINK THEY MIGHT KNOW A BIT MORE ABOUT IT THAN YOU
P.S. NUTRITION? NUTRITION? I’LL JUST EAT THIS APPLE AND IT’LL FIGHT ALL THESE BACTERIA AND VIRUSES. OR MAYBE POTATO CHIPS CAUSE MEASLES. STOP AND LISTEN TO YOURSELF HOLY CRAP.
Come on,Rogers,move it!
guys, remember how i can make everything about neuroscience? this scene, though. if steve’s hippocampus — that’s memory storage — is as super as the rest of him the way that the times square exhibit says…it’s actually not that far-fetched to conclude that when steve remembers something, he remembers it like this. like, this might not be an exaggeration. steve might be able to literally watch memories play out in front of him.
his nightmares must be horrible.
sorry. But this shows a lack of basic economic knowledge. Money sitting in a bank does not slow down the economy in any way. The way banks lend out money is by taking it out of people’s savings. So when a billionaire has money sitting in his account it is actually being loaned out to businesses to start up, or to homeowners to get a mortgage for their house. Having all the wealth at the top is actually the most efficient way. However much it sucks. This is where government is supposed to step in and provide equality. However in the us specifically due to gerrymandering, there is the most unproductive US government in history, and since they all have so much job security they have no problem taking bribes from lobbyists. At this point I would honestly not consider the US a democracy. Democracy demands choice, of whichever there is none in the current system. I believe any of the founding fathers would agree. That is what has lead to the income inequality. A broken government, not a broken economic system. Capitalism is the greatest invention of human kind. Even Karl Marx admitted it. Anyone who says otherwise is simply undereduated on the matter.Edit: woops, I forgot to say that I whole heartedly agree about paying a living wage. Only your reasoning was critically flawed
Folks, this morning I got an ask in my inbox from the learned individual above me. It said “Please refrain from making up statistics. It does everyone a disservice.” No context, no explanation of what it might have been in reference to, and not a thought in the asker’s head that while whatever had prompted it might have been fresh and new in his mind, it was likely something days or weeks or even months old.
I point this out because thinking that his message alone was sufficient to convey any meaning to me shows both a failure of critical thinking and of empathy, both of which are key to believing that pure unbridled capitalism is the greatest system on earth.
Even though when one receives nonsense in their inbox—and a drive-by observation with no indication about what the observation is about is nonsense, let’s make no mistake—there’s no obligation to puzzle out for oneself what one’s correspondent couldn’t be bothered to make clear, I came to this blog to see if I could spot what might have prompted it, and here it is.
I’ll note that this person had nothing to say about the statistics I used in the actual reply to this post, which is a convenient omission… the asker would like to believe that the stats are made-up, but is clearly not confident in that belief.
You have an overly simplistic view of how banks operate, but I’m glad you brought them up, because they offer a fairly recent example of how the economy is better served when money circulates closer to the bottom.
See, banks don’t literally take Moneybags Q. Rockefeller’s money from his account and give it to anyone who needs a loan. In point of fact, the money that banks lend out is represented by only a fraction of their actual liquid holdings.
The money banks lend out is actually borrowed directly from the federal reserve at a lower interest rate, with the bank’s assets that include Moneybags Q. Rockefeller’s cash simply the collateral. This is why the interest rate the bank will give you on your savings and charge you on your loans is tied to the federal reserve interest rate.
And actually, you can read the sentence “They don’t literally take Moneybags Q. Rockefeller’s money from his account and give it to anyone who needs a loan.” sentence with emphasis on either clause, because they really don’t give it to just anyone who needs a loan.
Maybe you’ve only recently started paying attention to the world, but you might recall that during the biggest round of the “too big to fail” bank bailouts, the decision was made to resolve the then-current level of crisis by pumping money into the banks to keep them solvent. The idea was that not only would this save the banks, but it would save the economy, because at that time, banks weren’t lending. There was a credit freeze, because their outstanding liabilities (loans, money they were owed) had too low a ratio against their cash on hand.
(Note that it’s not that they didn’t have enough cash on hand to cover their liabilities; they never do. It’s that the fraction was too low to allow them to do so.)
So the banks were either too broke or too nervous to lend money, and the economy ground to a halt, because we have a debt-driven society where individuals mostly lack the capital needed to start a business, build a home, or buy a vehicle, even though these can be essential parts of life and are major drivers of the economy.
(Sidenote: Capitalism! The greatest invention! will always and inevitably eventually lead us to the point where the economy grinds to a halt, because the competition that capitalism depends on has no reset button. Imagine if every time a team won a football game, they were allowed to carry over their score to the next game, and if they lost, they started over at 0. How many seasons would it be before a few teams had an unbeatable spread? And then next year, those teams would have an even bigger advantage. It takes an outside force—like government regulation—to ensure that the competition that capitalism depends on to do anything but produce an unsustainable oligarchy actually remains competitive.)
So, the American people or at least our representatives were sold on this marvelous plan whereby we give this money directly to the banks and they will then be free to start lending again.
Do you remember what happened next?
The banks, recognizing that the system was still shaky and volatile and that their basic position hadn’t changed, hoarded the money. The credit freeze continued.
It was a classic case of “YOU HAD ONE JOB!” We gave the money to the banks with a clear expectation of how it would be used, but no enforcement clause because ew, regulation, and because rational self-interest, and because invisible hand of the free market… but apparently the invisible hand was taking a personal day, because the predicted market forces did not act upon the banks and they acted in irrational self-interest to preserve themselves in a way that prolonged the crisis that was endangering them.
Even now it is markedly harder for the average person to get a loan for… well, anything. Loans have resumed, but money is still mainly circulating near the top, which in terms of overall health of an economy, is not much different from money being hoarded at the top.
Now, there was an alternate bailout plan that never got much traction for reasons having to do with the cultural consciousness of the U.S and how it’s been warped by worship of capitalism and the related “Just World” fallacy.
The alternate plan would have been to bail out the people whose homes were being foreclosed upon, the people whose mortgages were at the crux of that aspect of the crisis. Just take the same money and start paying off mortgages and other loans.
Now! What would the result have been? Well,the first thing is: the banks still get the same money. The money ends up in the hands of the bank. But all those people making mortgage payments also effectively get that money. Because the money they would have used for a payment is still in their hands, at whatever point they would have gotten it.
We the taxpayers spend the same money, but double the results! Magic, isn’t it? And the magic doesn’t stop there, because… again… the money in the homeowners’ hands will be spent, and passed on to someone else, who will spend it again, and again, and again… right on up the chain.
The extra money that the bailed out homeowners would have gotten due to the alternate plan would have still ended up at the top. Because that’s how capitalism works. So there’s no reason except base, venal greed of those at the top to oppose “bottom up” economics like this, and the economic lift they generate benefits the people at the top all the more.
A dollar released into the economy will keep being spent until it’s in the pocket of someone who can afford to save it, at which point it will be saved in a bank or invested in the markets. Even if you think the best place for the dollar is the bank/the markets, letting it run up the ladder first is helpful.
And the banks, under this plan? The banks can increase their lending based on this influx of cash, but we’re not depending on their generosity to jumpstart the economy as much as we did under the bailout we gave them. And since they’re no longer holding so many unstable assets but they also can’t look to the paid-off mortgages as a potential source of income, they have more of a reason to start making more loans, which from the bank’s point of view is an investment. Their lending is also emboldened by a rosier financial outlook, because all those people whose mortgages were paid off? They have a higher credit score. They have more money. They have fewer worries. They have more cash and more reason to spend it, which the economy kind of needs.
And the economic gains don’t stop there! A lot of people whose mortgages were “failing” (though “sabotage” might be a better word, though that’s another post) went through foreclosure. There’s a cascade effect here, as people who lose a house often lose so much more. First, there’s the equity they had in the house. The bank does not pay them back the money they’ve put in the house. They don’t “own their share” of the house, however long they’ve been paying off the mortgage. Second, there’s the expense of moving—if they could find another place—or the reality of homelessness, which makes it harder to hold a job or access basic services.
Basically, a foreclosure is one of the most expensive things a person can go through, but it’s something you only go through if you can’t afford it.
Capitalism! The greatest invention of mankind!
Now, let’s talk about all those foreclosed homes. Under the “money belongs in banks, that will jumpstart the economy!” plan, the banks ended up the proud owners of millions of empty houses that no one could afford to buy.
Is this good for the banks? No. Is it good for the economy? No. A house depreciates in value each year; an empty house deteriorates rapidly. The average foreclosed home in a bad economy is not an asset to a bank, but a liability that they feel in their hearts should be an asset.
According to the almighty laws of supply and demand, all those empty houses should have created a bonanza for first time homebuyers. It should have been a buyer’s market. Did you know banks have been paying to have empty houses bulldozed rather than maintaining them? Did you know that several municipalities have created—at the urging of banks—programs where banks can donate the land that was under these houses to the city for tax credits (that don’t come close to the value of the land, but if no one can afford to build or buy a house, then they can’t sell the land)?
According to basic market economics, if a bank is paying a dude in a bulldozer $2,000 (note: arbitrary figure, insert whatever number sounds realistic to you here) to destroy a house, I should be able to walk up and say, “Gentlemen, I will solve your problem for the low, low cost of $1,800.” As in, they pay me to take the house off their hands. Why shouldn’t they? If things worked the way the fairy tale version of capitalism says they should, banks would give away homes or pay people to take them before they paid more to destroy them.
And yet that didn’t happen, because the banks realized that if they sold their houses below “market value”, the price of homes would fall, and the value of their holdings would fall even farther. Note that “market value” here is not actual market value, the actual price the market will bear. According to fairy tale capitalism, with all these banks in the country we would just need to find the one bank that’s willing to deal fairly and give it our business and the other banks would follow suit or fall behind.
But that doesn’t work if the banks are more interested in protecting their own game.
So all those empty houses, deteriorating, losing value… people pumped a lot of money into those houses and a lot of that value is just gone. Rotted. Burned. Bulldozed.
If we’d injected the money closer to the bottom than the top, that value would still be around. We could have saved that value.
We have had decades of experience in all the myriad ways that trickle-down economics don’t work, but the main reason is the simplest: money doesn’t trickle down in a capitalist system. Expecting it to is like expecting the higher scoring team in a game’s points to leak over to the other team’s side.
If we’d bailed out from the bottom up… the banks would have gotten their money, but everyone else would have benefited and the economy would have been lifted as all those dollars “trickled up”.
It’s really not that hard to tell actors from their characters
Like, this is Loki
And this is Tom. They have different colored hair.
This is Castiel
And this is Misha. They wear different clothes.
This is Tony Stark
And this is Robert Downey Jr. They have different names.
Actually, don’t forget that Tony Stark is about half a foot taller. RDJ is a tiny tiny man and it’s hilarious.
Elsa in the library vs. Elsa during her coronation
comment from a person on youtube whose name i don’t remember.
this is how you make “gay jokes” folks
having two parents of any gender would suck because when u need one of them you’d be like “mom” and the wrong one will reply and you have to go “not you the OTHER one” and thats why if i marry a girl and we have kids she can be mom and i will be optimus prime
Before you call someone a hipster, make sure you know that prism thingy’s more than a t-shirt.
#3. The Internet Doesn’t Know What “Hipster” Means
Aside from generalizations about fashion (tight jeans, androgynous shaggy haircuts, and thick framed glasses), hipsters espouse a counterculture aesthetic. They value more obscure forms of art and entertainment. In a sentence, the hipster prides himself on knowing what the cool stuff is and knowing it before everyone else thought it was cool.
But too many people on the Internet seem to think a hipster is anyone who knows something you don’t. I’ve had people in the comments refer to me as a hipster for liking Pink Floyd. PINK FLOYD. One of the biggest acts of the 1970s, one of the best-selling artists of all time in one of the most popular forms of music in the 20th century. That’s not some obscure pick designed to impress. That’s me saying, yep, that band that’s always in everyone’s top 10 of classic rock, I love them, too, just like millions of other people.