Valsuelm

there's a difference between hardworking and ambitious though. I agree that someone who works his ass off builds a business etc should have a higher standard of living than a burger flipper, but someone who works his ass off as a burger flipper shouldn't have to live in poverty. It all depends on how productive he's being. If a guy works his ass off but achieves next to nothing; then he deserves next to nothing. It's not about effort; it's about results. Eh... in principle I agree. However the world is a bit contrived in many respects, places, and situations, for it to be that simple. One example: Put yourself in the shoes of a sweat shop slave factory worker. Who is working their asses off for a ubercrappy wage, doing the same work as someone in pick your favorite 'well to do' western nation, yet seeing a lot less for it, and with no reasonable avenue to earn more. While the reasons for this are varied, communism isn't the answer, capitalism isn't the problem. But at the end of the day, there is something wrong here, and I think most of us would agree such a person should earn more for their labor.

Will this physical copy come with a DvD (with the game on it) and manual? Or is it going to be like Wasteland 2? It pains me to even ask, but apparently InXile thought it was okay to sell boxes without a manual or even the actual game in it. Read reviews on Amazon if you're not familiar with this: http://www.amazon.com/Wasteland-2-PC/dp/B00NA6LH58/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I completely agree, I see how totally lazy and unmotivated some people are on a daily basis. Why should they now have the same benefits that people who work hard and are productive have? I think (I'm no expert; any commies feel free to correct me) that they intend to force people to work. Thus everyone will work hard and be productive. Well. You're supposed to be enlightened enough and 'caring' enough to know and want to contribute to the greater good as determined by your intellectual betters. If you are unenlightened or if you're of the uncaring sort then you'll be deemed a thought criminal and assigned to one of the many depopulation programs, and yes of course likely to suffer in a forced labor camp while you await your ultimate fate for the better of society. Your average commie would never admit this, and in their defense they likely didn't think far enough ahead or just plain weren't smart enough to see what's on their glorious utopian horizon. The term 'useful idiot' applies to well over 90% of them I'd say, with the remaining folks earning the term 'evil mother@#%(ers'

It's nice to see shots from the game, however I almost think too much was shown. Either way, there was nothing spectacular about this trailer. Paradox better do better. If they don't do something as good as their Crusader Kings 2 promotions, which are really the only good promotions I've ever seen them do, I'm going to say that Obsidian never should have partnered with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=302YMeiDSrI

Figured as much from the previews. A number of my historically inept and propaganda yumming up friends loved it though so I guess it's good at what it does.

Communism on a national scale requires a government to enforce it's doctrines, capitalism does not. Comparing the two is comparing apples and frogs. Real capitalism is essentially what you get without government interference. It's what people naturally will generally do on their own, if left alone. Capitalism gets a bad wrap it doesn't deserve as so much of what's negatively attributed to it is not capitalism, but in fact symptoms caused by fascist or socialist policies. It's another example of calling a pot a tiger. The west's economy is not primarily capitalist. It's primarily socialist/fascist, and has been for the better part of a century now. You have people constantly talking about 'free trade', 'free markets', and the benefits of capitalism, but the reality is that the people at the top have been benefiting from socialist/fascist policies that they bought and paid for a long time ago, and we don't really have 'free trade' or 'free markets'. The only people engaging in free trade or free markets are the people who engage in illegal activity, as real free trade and markets have been outlawed in most or all of the west. When the government gets involved in the market (and I'm talking the market, not the 'stock market') you don't have capitalism. The government is and has been heavily involved in the western markets for a long long time now.

Pretty much. Which is why people call it socialism these days. They are one in the same as socialism is communism when applied on a national scale. Despite many people, including people on this forum thinking they are different. It is astounding to a degree just how easily many people are fooled. Get enough people to call a pot a tiger and many people will think that a pot is indeed a tiger and not a pot, especially if a trusted government official or the news says it is. There's a great many examples of this in modern real world politik, and other places cultural marxism has touched. The corruption of ideas and ideals is widespread.

I've heard it's like what a Kubrick Fantastic Four would be. Is that accurate? No. It's really not comparable to 2001 other than they are both movies set in space. The plot, ambiance, characters, pretty much everything is different. It is it's own movie. Comparing the two is like comparing 'Django Unchained' and 'The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly'.

So its really so good? I was afraid of too much melodrama and political messages but maybe I will reconsider trip to cinema then.. I was weary of the same thing going in. I was pleasantly surprised.

...and you if one wants they can go from these videos and educate themselves. Or as most will, not.

Communism ideals when they're applied on any scale larger than 100% voluntary participation (which is to say, pretty much anything larger than a small commune of people wanting to live together under those circumstances) are evil. Communism is definitely not dead though, that's one heck of a myth as it's probably never been healthier than it is today. "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.'

I imagine that will be about as accurate as the BAC breathalyzer, which is to say: not accurate at all. But that won't stop folks from using them, or government contracts aplenty being made to commission their construction. I will find humor in whatever is deemed the 'legal limit' of THC on the breathe though. That will truly be amusing.

Exactly, hence the need to approach legalization intelligently. It is hard to enforce when people are under the influence of pot. In most states, just the smell or a small amount is enough to get the driver off the road, but if it is a legal substance, that no longer happens. So we need a better system to police it. Wait, what? So we should just accept that people are going to drive under the influence, and ignore the issue? No. As I said, it's already illegal to drive while your ability is impaired. Just because pot becomes legal doesn't mean it's suddenly ok to drive around stoned, any more than it's ok to drive around while your ability is impaired due to all sorts of currently legal substances. The issue is one in your head, not in reality.

Oh for the love of... 'oby' isn't a Russian. Just read some of these posts again, and look at the gramar and spelling. It's not even remotely Russian, it's very plainly someone obsessed with Russia pretending to be Russian. If you want to find out what Russians think then by all means do so. They have a rich culture and many are well educated and erudite. Talking to oby is tantamount to interrogating my toilet bowl on the habits of the Plain Indians. If I cared for your opinion on Oby, or anyone else's, I'd ask. I don't. I'm curious as to what Oby has to say on a given subject. I'm certainly not interested in reading more mindless anti-Oby posts. There are far more than enough on this forum already.

Really? The prohibition of marijuana is 10,000x the problem that recreational marijuana use is. I'm going to go out on a limb and say your statistical analysis might be a bit off. I'm for intelligent legalization, but there are a ton of problems that need to be addressed. The DUI question alone is a huge puzzle. There is no puzzle in regards to the 'DUi question'. It's already illegal to drive while your ability is impaired in every state in the nation. It's a law that isn't enforced all that often though, as DWI laws (driving while intoxicated, specifically in regards to alcohol) are far more lucrative as well as generally easier for the government to enforce. That said, I think a lot of people would be surprised just how common it is for people to drive while their ability is impaired. Be it from being too tired, popping one's favorite psychotropic, some other legal drug as ordained by big pharma and their locale priest some like to think of as their doctor, texting while driving, putting one's make up on, or whatever else. There's probably not a licensed driver in this forum that hasn't been guilty of driving while their ability was impaired at one point in time or another. Millions of people do it every single day, and there's probably no point in time where there's more of them on the road doing it than that morning 'rush hour'. Intelligent legalization is legalization. That's it. Make it legal, end of story.

State and Federal laws already force various prohibitions and racial segregations on people. Hello encyclopedia long laundry list of things one cannot do or own legally, and hello 'affirmative action' and other race based government funded things/decisions. In regards to the former, it depends on what we're prohibiting if I find it acceptable or not, though I'm generally against any kind of 'zero tolerance' laws, in regards to the latter it's never acceptable. Your point?

I do listen to Colbert and Stewart. That doesn't change the fact that Maher is right about this. And about a great many other things as well. "Trickle down economy" has never worked! Not once. Not in any country, anywhere, ever! It is complete and utter nonsense. Tax cuts for the wealthy serves one purpose and one purpose alone. Make the wealthy wealthier! The don't create more jobs, when they get richer, they don't buy more. They just get richer. And the money accumulates on fewer and fewer hands. What makes the wealthy create more jobs and invest more money in production is one thing and one thing only: More demand for what ever it is they make money on. Taxes is about taking money from the rich and put them back in circulation. You want to get a capitalist economy working? Raise the taxes on the wealthy and lower it for the middle and the lowest incomes. They get more money, they spend more money. On stuff. Stuff that other people produce. It is so simple that anyone who's not a greedy, right wing politician or millionaire can see it. Another person in a box, a much smaller one. Think! Look at the evidence and think! Stop regurgitating BS spouted by countless talking heads on TV. The entire dialogue in regards to 'trickle down economics' is a farce. A red herring. It's got as much to do with the real world as the musings of prepubescent kids on where the boogie man goes during the day time. The very rich (and even many others) don't pay much or any income taxes. They never have, and they never will. 501 (c )s and their like are one of the big reasons why, but there are many other ways to avoid taxes, some legal, some illegal. The national income tax is an evil perpetrated upon citizens of nation X by the very rich. It's a superb control mechanism and a nifty way to help smudge the books to justify the fantasy banking system most of the world operates on. It is absolutely no coincidence that the U.S. got it's income tax at the same time the Federal Reserve Banking System was started. You've got a lot to learn. Here's two tips of the iceberg to start at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H56FUHgqRNE

No. They did not. The idea that the states are sovereign is codified in the U.S. Constitution to this day, though not as much as it was during the first decades and century or so of the republic. There have been a few major blows to the States being in charge. First and foremost would be the U.S. Civil War / War of Northern Aggression. Followed not too far behind by the 16th and 17th amendments, the Federal Reserve Act, and many rulings by FDR's packed SCOTUS. To this day though, the states are indeed Constitutionally in charge of a great deal more than most think they are. The biggest obstacle states probably have these days isn't the federal government itself, but people such as yourself who "don't see what's so great about state's rights". Or worse, the many others for whom the concept of states rights doesn't even exist. It would behoove you to endeavor to step outside the box you're in in regards to 'conservatives' vs. whomever, and the largely mythical political arm of the Christian zealot club. They have oodles less power than you think, and the vast majority of Christians, like most other folks, aren't zealots of any kind.

As I already said: It is not a 'conservative' vs. 'liberal' or whomever issue. Never has been.

Maher is a class A moron. A bitter shallow minded semi comedic hack that seems to find fans from other politically shallow minded, jaded, or bitter folks. If you're going to listen to a modern guy who thinks he's a comedian take on the news at least listen to someone who is occasionally amusing like Colbert or Stewart. No one alive I know of has anything on Carlin or Hicks though, both of whom were far more intelligent and funny than any of the aforementioned. As for Texas and marijuana? Probably within 10-15 years tops, as with all the other states. Texas is not the red state it once was. Like most other large cities in the U.S., Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and especially Houston are bastions of socialist nutjobs. As those cities grow and the urbanite ignorant masses who suck in brainwashing propaganda like a sponge swell Texas grows bluer and bluer. That said, it's a myth that Republicans are against legalizing marijuana and Democrats are for it. You have numerous people in both parties that are for and against it, and most 'blue' states, including the one I live in are quite aways from legalizing it (if I were wagering I'd wager Texas will legalize it before New York). Right now it's still generally perceived as politically unintelligent to come out for legalization (note that for the most part where it's become legal it was made legal by ballot initiative, not due to politicians passing bills) though this is slowly changing. Legalizing drugs however is going to be interesting in the long run as it's one of a few major emerging fronts where the states will be pit against the Feds. I don't see the federal government ending it's 'war on drugs' anytime remotely soon, despite the growing sentiment all over the U.S. (it's actually very large now) that it needs to end.

Oby, I'm curious, and you're one of the only Russians I have contact with so I ask you. What's the prevailing Russian point of view on the Apollo missions to the moon, both today and historically?

In my opinion Genesis' output from the early to mid 70s can go toe to toe with any band's output in a similar stretch of time. They put out some amazing stuff during those years. Aye. I'd say they put out some amazing stuff after those years as well. Even if one isn't that big a fan of the more poppy stuff, there's not one Genesis album that doesn't have an awesome prog song on it. Studio albumwise Selling England and Lamb Lies Down are probably my favorites but many others aren't that far behind. Seconds Out and Three Sides Live (original US release) are easily my most listened to Genesis albums as well as my most listened to albums of any band period (and I've got them on Vinyl, Cassette, and CD). If I made a list of my favorite songs by Genesis, many of them are post Gabriel era, and I think that they were at their peak on stage in the late 70s early 80s. (I also happen to think Gabriel reached his peak on stage post Genesis as well). Certainly some of the best drums I've ever heard are Collins and Thompson banging away together. I mean, here they are, at the height of their 'poppy era' on the Invisible Touch Tour, which I don't even think is their best tour, nor is this even the best Los Endos I've heard, but holy smokes is it still awesome.

If I had to pick my favorite band, Genesis would be my answer. And if I had to pick my favorite studio album by them, Selling England by the Pound would be it. And they've got a lot of great studio albums. That said, Genesis was at their best on stage.

Interstellar 9/10