Jump to content

Janderson133

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Man, I was gonna post something about how folks were jumping to conclusions and that maybe you were looking to learn, but dude - don't make it so easy for folks to be convinced that you're a jerk.
  2. Isn't that like half of the government's job?
  3. Exactly right - there is a lack of real world value in those degrees. That said, I'm not sure that notion applies to wrestlers, but maybe there's a large community of 14th century French poetry majors in the wrestling community.
  4. I think it depends on how you're valuing the college experience. The student loan crisis as a starting point would be indicative of a lack of real world value being derived from the college experience. Though one could also argue that there are social benefits. Frankly, I'd be 100% in favor of providing a brief business-based curriculum (taxes, accounting, sales) and then encouraging kids to learn a trade.
  5. Ah, I miss the "is Joe Smith gonna make weight" era. Seriously though, getting him first thing was the best time to get him, five hours after weigh-in, that's a different guy.
  6. LOL - can't we get an update on what each school plans to do in 2021/22 for winter sports?
  7. You seem to know something about it, so question. I'd read that there were 44k in the Pfizer study, with 22k in the placebo/22k in the vaccine group. If 162 people got COVID in the placebo, is it reasonable to extrapolate that as a ratio for the general population? Or is it a situation where we are better off looking at the positivity rate of the vaccine group, and simply assuming that 100% of people will eventually get COVID?
  8. Here - lemme help you. In the world as it is, you have to choose between the options that exist. If you have a banana and an apple, and you prefer the apple, it doesn't necessarily mean that you wouldn't prefer an orange. However, when you express a preference, it indicates that you 'prefer' one thing to another (in my example, the apple over the banana). If you would like to advocate for a third, fourth or even fifth option, feel free. But, umm, that's how preferences work when expressed in the manner above.
  9. It's not a false dichotomy - the individual stated a preference for one over the other. Personally, I disagree (as noted), but the dichotomy is very real - I prefer this system to that one, and cu155 views the other as a worthwhile trade off. I'm not sure how to make that one simpler. "People can argue about 'freedom' all they want but the reality is that someone in China currently has much more freedom to go to school or a restaurant or a doctor's visit without fear of contracting and dying from Covid than someone in the US. Not a bad trade off."
  10. Dude - you're nuts if: 1. You think that any information coming out of China on this topic, or any other is accurate. I mean, from concentration camps (https://www.businessinsider.com/video-chinese-ambassador-confronted-over-blindfolded-uighur-muslims-2020-7), to COVID cases (less than most US states) - there's a well documented history. 2. You'd trade this for that. I mean, life sucks sometimes in the US, but at least you get to live it without worrying about the government disappearing you because you're suddenly out of favor. But, as I'm reminded frequently, some people like different stuff. You might honestly prefer that, and that's ok.
  11. See, this is what I like. Fun talk - making fun of a bunch of people arguing about government overreach on a wrestling message board. Kudos sir!
  12. That's a well-thought out and articulated approach. I would ask, though - if building codes are a social good, then increasing the privately owned value of housing wouldn't seem to necessarily be the real benefit. It could be preventing poorly built stock from entering supply, or to protect an unsuspecting populous from unscrupulous builders. Either way - nicely put. The evolution of acceptable restriction is worthwhile, as long as there is the capability for reversal - think the approval of saccharine and subsequent evidence of it being a carcinogen. Flexibility is probably the best medicine here.
  13. Unfortunately - that's the world we live in. If you want to put forth a proposal to regulate things so that there will be no potential fires, I applaud your effort. However, the same could be said for wood burning stoves, those that accidentally start fires while cooking, or any number of other potential fire hazards. You can want people to live their lives by your standard - but you might consider wanting in your right hand, while defecating in your left and seeing which fills more quickly....
×
×
  • Create New...