Jump to content

Maedhros

Members
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Maedhros

  1. The biggest issue for me is that all the added backstory to Yen and Ciri strips away the dialogue and the side-characters from Geralt's short stories. I think they would've been wiser to start off with 3-4 (edit: episodes) solely focused on Geralt before properly introducing the other two.

    Overall though I'm quite hyped for the next season. Especially if they get a bigget budget. Some of the cgi stuff was quite bad.

  2. 8 hours ago, Gromnir said:

    what is left out o' the story is the winner o' the previous four seasons o' the fantasy league were a one-eyed goat with lead poisoning who chose her fantasy teams by eating pumpkins with random player names painted on 'em. goat finally died from heavy metal poisoning and so carlsen were able to slip into the winning slot.

    HA! Good Fun!

    Haha, I get your point, but there is a good deal of skill involved too. You have some guys who consistently finish in the top 1k (of around 6-7 millions) every season. It took my friends 4 seasons to realize that they don't really stand a chance against the know-how guys in our money leagues.

  3. Fun fact about her is that she is the child of two same-sex parents. Surely that's a first as far as state leaders go?

    Also, TIL there's a political party in Finland called "Swedish People's Party of Finland"

  4. 2 hours ago, Skarpen said:

    But what happened to the notion "if you don't pay enough to your workers you are making them into slaves?", huh? 
    Guess that doesn't apply to "public slaves" apparently.

    And at which point it went for people to applaud politicians on the basis of decision they made for themselves instead of the people?

    If the guy would made the city better I wouldn't mind if he would give himself a 1000% raise, if he would turn the city to crap lowering the wage to zero wouldn't give him an ounce of credit in my book.

    Besides if any public servant can influence his own salary in any way it's not the best system I would say.

     

    Who said anything about not paying anyone enough? He clearly thought he was being paid more than enough, which is why he suggested lowering his own wages. He made a suggestion to the "city council", and they voted in favour of his suggestion, so it's not like he forced it through on his own. His only condition was that the money would go to certain things like elderly care, youth clubs and alike.

    Why not give praise to someone who's willing to sacrifice something to the benefit of others? Whether he does a good job remains to be seen, so any speculation on that front is pointless.

    Not really interested in starting a discussion on money and motivation, and how one should reward good work. My post was more a case of "feelgood - a Politician who isn't motivated by greed and power" type of post. Unless of course his wage reducement is all a ploy in order to gain sympathy and more voters! You never know.

  5. 5 hours ago, Skarpen said:

    You have a weird definition of freedom. By that standard a stray dog is less free than an owned dog. Owned dog have free food, free healthcare and free education. But it also have an owner and it can go out, breed and gets put to sleep at the owner's whim. Having commodities doesn't equal freedom. It gives you more comfort and luxury but there is always a fine print that screws you over at the end.

    It sounds nice until put in practice when you realise that free healthcare is garbage and free education is replaced by propaganda centers and that you have no say in how you are treated and what you learn. We went through this not so long ago, why people still have this misguided sentiment?

    It sounds weird to you because you think of freedom as "freedom from constraints", whereas I think of freedom as "the ability to do something" - it's a pretty classic divide in how one interprets "Freedom". Read up on Negative/Positive freedom. Having free education will realistically give poor people easier access to education = more freedom for them.

    Free healthcare doesn't have to be garbage, nor does free education. Your analogy is quite good btw, if I were a dog I'd rather be an owned dog with a good owner than a stray dog.

  6. As a word it is quite meaningless when people interpret it so differently yeah.

    Socalism to me? Free healthcare and education should be a human right, and something we should aspire to have together. Why not make life easier for all of us if we can? If I were rich I'd gladly pay high taxes to help benefit a system like that, just like I do now with my average wage. If that's "socialism", then socialism sounds more "free" to me than a system that can potentially enslave and cripple you with debt for the rest of your life. I can't say I often feel envy, but rather a strong feeling of wanting everyone to have the same opportunities I've had.

    Use the collective to make life better for the individual. Sacrifice some freedom (tax), to gain more freedom (free healthcare/education, long m/paternity leave, longer holidays, etc).

    On a sidenote, I also think working hours in pretty much all jobs should decrease. FREEDOM!

  7. 3 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

    Socialism appeals to envy. This person has more than I do and it's not fair! Waaaaaa. Of course it's all a sham anyway. Bernie and Warren can promise the moon but they will never be able to deliver. The AOCs of the world no withstanding Congress is not going to go along with anything so radical as what those clowns are proposing. So it's all just a show. 

    It has to do with justice more than envy. People who work their asses off shouldn't struggle economically - yet many do. So yes, Waaaaa, it's not fair!

    Most people can't seem to understand that democratic socialism isn't about leaving a capitalist system, or preventing people from getting rich. You want the best of both worlds.

     

×
×
  • Create New...