FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » old man blogs at cloud (Page 22)

  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  ...  35  36  37   
Author Topic: old man blogs at cloud
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
Hello, I am here as a genuine person who is "curious," about OSC's point of view.

HOW DARE YOU TELL ME THE TRUTH YOU LEFTALIBAN SWINE!

DELETE MY ACCOUNT!

I could have saved a whole page of reading if I'd just skipped right to this post.
Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
oh right i guess i was so interested by the 'in the mormon church there are no paid positions' line that i didn't even bother to mention this yet but

quote:
Leftists, like the perfect mindless conformists that they are, will reply, "Look at the condition Bush left us in, with quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan!" They can say this because they believe their own propaganda -- they called Iraq and Afghanistan "quagmires" before we even invaded them. But the fact is that by the time he left the White House, President George W. Bush had followed the counsel of the wisest military leaders and we were well on the road to long-term victory, including nation-building, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

No, the mess came about because Obama announced a deadline for withdrawal from both countries, which instantly made America irrelevant in both countries, no matter how many troops remained. Obama created ISIS by the premature withdrawal of a very effective occupation force long before the faction-riven Iraqi military could create itself as an effective, unified army.

if someone could sit down with orson scott card for like, say, ten to fifteen minutes could we get a signed acknowledgement from him that he understands and confirms his understanding that the withdrawal plan was designed by, signed, and put into motion by George W Bush during his administration

like i'm not even joking here because i would like some confirmation one way or the other that he will at least demonstrate understanding of what makes this whole pair of paragraphs nigh farcical —

here is a relevant patch of text from wikipedia

quote:
in 2008 George W. Bush signed the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. It included a deadline of 31 December 2011, before which "all the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory".[11][12][13] The last U.S. troops left Iraq on 18 December 2011, in accordance with this agreement.[1][11][12]
can he also acknowledge in some form that it was the bush administration and its administrative handlers who ignored the 'wisest military leaders' which were responsible for the disbanding of the iraqi military, a move almost wholly understood to have been the most dire and critical mistake of the occupation? WAIT NO i am asking too much i should just stick to figuring out if he even just understands that obama wasn't why we left iraq in 2011, bush was, and it was bush's plan in the first place that we were out by 2011
Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by dkw:
I'm more familiar with the mainline Protestants. Salaries for the top leaders in the United Methodist, ELCA Lutheran, and United Church of Christ are all in the 100,000 - 150,000 range.

The head of our Church lives in a literal palace and has taken a vow of poverty so I don't even know where to start. Maybe the Mormons have more in common with the Catholics than they would like to believe.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dogbreath: I chewed up a lengthier post in the interest of ending this conversation because I've grown to loathe it.

I've failed to correctly recall all the things I've said in this conversation. Yes, GAs are compensated by having their living expenses paid. I was incorrect in my contention over the use of the word "compensation".

After doing research, I found that apostles and members of the First Presidency are paid a living stipend that is drawn solely from church investment income. I think $300K a year is far beyond what what they receive. But that too constitutes some form of wage or salary. I did not know about this stipend.

I do not believe tithing funds are involved.

quote:
What's actually happening is they're getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for every imaginable "living expense" - including luxuries like private cooks that most people don't have
I don't believe that. You have not shown that they are in fact senselessly milking the church for amenities they don't need. Folks have mentioned President Monson having waitstaff. Maybe he needs help getting dressed in the morning, or somebody to bathe him. You mention a private cook, maybe he has a house maid or family member that helps prepare his meals because he can't. When I lived in Hong Kong, retaining a house keeper was not expensive, and the majority of people there had them. Context matters.

The fact is the articles you have presented speculate that because Mission Presidents have lots of expenses covered and even have small sums given to them to spend on gifts or plane rides home that the higher up general authorities must have an even better deal. That they must be living life styles akin to corporate executives. That has not been really demonstrated. I've already conceded that it's hard to demonstrate because church financials are not open.

It's also hard because many of the GAs were men of means before being called and so probably have their own substantial amounts of personal savings. If Elder Oaks was driving a BMW I could not say whether he purchased it or the church did.

If it could be proven the latter was the case I would be angry. But the article linked does not demonstrate that.

Please stop telling me that I "Know very well...". I am doing my best in this conversation, and I have *never* lied. I make mistakes in that I cannot always hold the pathway a conversation as taken in my mind. I make mistakes, but I don't deceive so as to win in a conversation.

quote:
How do you know that? The actual leaked documents seem to indicate that money is really going to pay for the mission presidents' "living expenses." (housekeeper, kids tuition, flights, cook, cars, etc.)
How do I know what? That missionaries often spend more than they pay in? Math. Or that the money that goes into the missionary funds goes to missionary work? I guess I don't? But the money comes from somewhere. Odds are it comes from the fund, there's not really a good reason why it would not. But if it wasn't that would be an incredible case of fraud. And kind of odd.
Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Samprimary: I said this and was honestly surprised nobody responded, but then the youngin showed up and got ated.

quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
From Mr. Card,
quote:
Leftists, like the perfect mindless conformists that they are, will reply, "Look at the condition Bush left us in, with quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan!" They can say this because they believe their own propaganda -- they called Iraq and Afghanistan "quagmires" before we even invaded them. But the fact is that by the time he left the White House, President George W. Bush had followed the counsel of the wisest military leaders and we were well on the road to long-term victory, including nation-building, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They were called quagmires because in many people's estimations they were. I've never read anything that suggested that Iraq was ever well on the way to long-term nation-building for either of those two nations.

quote:
No, the mess came about because Obama announced a deadline for withdrawal from both countries, which instantly made America irrelevant in both countries, no matter how many troops remained. Obama created ISIS by the premature withdrawal of a very effective occupation force long before the faction-riven Iraqi military could create itself as an effective, unified army.

Mr. Card has said this several times, and I'm honestly confused. From what I understand, President Bush in 2007 agreed to the withdrawal time tables in Iraq. Iraqi leaders would only consider extending those withdrawal time tables if the US agreed to allow Iraqi judicial courts to try US soldiers and contractors for crimes. A non-starter condition. Iraqi politicians knew this, and insisted on it because their bosses in Iran wanted it.

President Obama stuck to his predecessors timeline rather than undermine Iraq's sovereignty by ignoring the timelines.

Or am I missing something in the history?


Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bush signed the agreement in 2008, so I was wrong about the year.
Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As we know, OSC hates liberals.

Probably offensive speculation: I think the reason why is that they didn't embrace him wholeheartedly when he made some really strenuous efforts in the 80's to bridge his religion and liberalism. I think he really tried (really). He came from the most conservative Mormon place on earth, and something like Secular Humanist Revival was a huge departure from the traditions of his people. That, and other things like having gay characters in his fiction, earned him flack from his community. But he still also got attacked by people on the Left, so I think he decided that they suck.

But I think this is why he loved GWB: because liberals hated him. I think he identified with the guy.

It must be hard to see past the fact that liberals are OK with Obama and really hated GWB. I mean, it must be if you can overlook basic facts like that the withdrawal timeline from Iraq was a GWB thing, not an Obama thing. Of course, many in the GOP or their media friends lie about this, but I think they do so knowingly, and I don't think OSC knows it's a lie.

Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*I mean, OK with him. I don't feel like there's all that much fondness left, just a compulsion to defend him against unreasonable attacks. He has a lot of defenders, fewer fans.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Please stop telling me that I "Know very well...". I am doing my best in this conversation, and I have *never* lied. I make mistakes in that I cannot always hold the pathway a conversation as taken in my mind. I make mistakes, but I don't deceive so as to win in a conversation.
THIS was my problem DB in the past. It (quickly) went from a discussion of facts to implied accusations of dishonesty & a veiled aggression.

I have in past been labeled as a member of the "Tone Police"...and I have had a tendency to jump to my own defense when actually wrong.

Ignorance & mistakes are universal.

Seeking knowledge & admiting one is wrong are difficult & at times an overly forceful hand in trying to correct these beliefs can polarize opponents.

Basically...when it feels like a personal attack, changing people's minds becomes all but impossible.

*penny* *penny*

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was having this same argument with someone once when I pointed out it was GWB that signed the Status of Forces Agreement (which, incidentally, I learned from Samp here), and his response was 'Oh, well he should have changed it."

*shrugs*

Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But isn't one of their central complaints that Obama abuses the power of the presidency by overstepping his bounds and not working with republican plans
Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CT
Member
Member # 8342

 - posted      Profile for CT           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Surely you jest, Samp.
Posts: 831 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:
Originally posted by dkw:
I'm more familiar with the mainline Protestants. Salaries for the top leaders in the United Methodist, ELCA Lutheran, and United Church of Christ are all in the 100,000 - 150,000 range.

The head of our Church lives in a literal palace and has taken a vow of poverty so I don't even know where to start. Maybe the Mormons have more in common with the Catholics than they would like to believe.
AND controls one of the largest private investment banks in the world, which is regulated by exactly no one.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
basically it turned into a situation where obama literally just followed the withdrawal agreement, timetable, and treaty that was put into place before he even became president, and conservatives blame him for literally anything bad that happens in the country post-occupation on account of that fact

but if he had revoked the treaty and the timetable for some reason conservatives would have screamed bloody murder about how they had a workable plan for withdrawal and it would have solved everything but instead Obama is installing himself as the new American imperial autocrat.

and literally everything bad happening in the country past that point would be obama's fault.

what an interesting game they play

Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
Dogbreath: I chewed up a lengthier post in the interest of ending this conversation because I've grown to loathe it.

I've failed to correctly recall all the things I've said in this conversation. Yes, GAs are compensated by having their living expenses paid. I was incorrect in my contention over the use of the word "compensation".

After doing research, I found that apostles and members of the First Presidency are paid a living stipend that is drawn solely from church investment income. I think $300K a year is far beyond what what they receive. But that too constitutes some form of wage or salary. I did not know about this stipend.

So you concede that the statement "the Mormon Church has no paid positions" is untrue?

quote:
I do not believe tithing funds are involved.
Where did the Church get the money to make those investments with which to pay it's officers?

quote:
I don't believe that. You have not shown that they are in fact senselessly milking the church for amenities they don't need.
That's because I haven't claimed any such thing.

Nor has anyone in this thread.

In fact every single person who has participated in this discussion has explicitly tried to disabuse you of the notion that that is what we are claiming. I have personally done so no less than 6 times. And you have even directly replied to me doing so.

quote:
The fact is the articles you have presented speculate that because Mission Presidents have lots of expenses covered and even have small sums given to them to spend on gifts or plane rides home that the higher up general authorities must have an even better deal. That they must be living life styles akin to corporate executives. That has not been really demonstrated. I've already conceded that it's hard to demonstrate because church financials are not open.
I have no good reason to assume that even though Mission Presidents are being compensated for living expenses worth hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, their superiors are not. But even if they're only being paid, say, $100,000 a year, you still must concede that the statement "there are no paid positions in the Mormon Church" is a lie.

quote:
Please stop telling me that I "Know very well...". I am doing my best in this conversation, and I have *never* lied. I make mistakes in that I cannot always hold the pathway a conversation as taken in my mind. I make mistakes, but I don't deceive so as to win in a conversation.
BlackBlade, I said "you know very well" because you did know very well that I said that. You both read *and replied* to me saying it.

It is not unreasonable for me to assume that you in fact know things that you have acknowledged knowing. Nor am I accusing you of lying - I acknowledge you may just have a terrible memory. But you acting indignant that I am asking you to maintain a basic level of integrity in this conversation is very frustrating. How gentle and kind in my reminders of "hey buddy, that's not actually what I said but it's ok [Smile] " do I have to be?

Like, I've been gently reminding you of what has actually been said this entire conversation while giving you the benefit of the doubt, and you've taken that kindness as permission to walk all over me. Then when I finally decide enough is enough and call you on it, you cast yourself as the victim. Don't you see how manipulative that is?

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dogbreath:
quote:
So you concede that the statement "the Mormon Church has no paid positions" is untrue?
I've never said the Mormon church has no paid positions. It has thousands of employees who are paid salaries. I said the general authorities are not paid salaries.

The Apostles and member of the First Presidency (15 men) all have living stipends drawn from church investments. So for all practical purposes they are being paid.

quote:
Where did the Church get the money to make those investments with which to pay it's officers?
I don't know. Were I guessing from donations from the members which were then invested bringing in returns which were then reinvested. Members often leave money, land, and valuables to the church. It is certainly possible tithing was involved in some church investments initially such as BYU, but I doubt that is the case today.

quote:
That's because I haven't claimed any such thing.

Nor has anyone in this thread.

In fact every single person who has participated in this discussion has explicitly tried to disabuse you of the notion that that is what we are claiming. I have personally done so no less than 6 times. And you have even directly replied to me doing so.

Oh really? By talking about leer jets, and armored security cars? And $300K-$500K in speculated living expense compensation? And all the wait staff that are retained? I'm not convinced.

quote:
I have no good reason to assume that even though Mission Presidents are being compensated for living expenses worth hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, their superiors are not. But even if they're only being paid, say, $100,000 a year, you still must concede that the statement "there are no paid positions in the Mormon Church" is a lie.
As stated above there are many paid positions in the LDS church. The accountant who audits the church's books for example is paid a salary. The teachers, bishops, stake presidents, Seventies, Mission Presidents, and Temple Presidents do not get paid salaries. In some cases such as Mission Presidents, living expenses are covered. But other than that nobody gets any money for their service.

This is in contrast to many other sects where everybody from the bishop up is paid, and there is no cap on what that income might be.

But anyway, are there church leaders who get paid. I will say yes.

quote:
BlackBlade, I said "you know very well" because you did know very well that I said that. You both read *and replied* to me saying it.
No, I don't know. There are all sorts of things I, you, and others say that I honestly forget they are being said, especially in conversations where there are many people directing commentary to one person.

Yes, I probably need to do a better job reviewing posts again and again when I respond so as to shore up those silly mistakes, but I'm also trying to do you all the courtesy of responding when I don't always have enough time to do so adequately. Mathematically I'm going to spend more time writing than you and two other people all responding to me.

If I say something that doesn't hold up based on past comments, just remind me what was said previously and/or quote it. Leave what I actually know alone.

I'm sorry you feel walked all over, such is not my intention. It really isn't. You asked a question, I answered it, you then started probing. I have tried to give you an honest conversation on a potentially contentious topic and not once have I commented on your personal motivations or integrity.

Don't comment on mine, I don't have the emotional energy to deal with people telling me I'm playing games to win internet debate points. I try always to tell the truth, and admit fault when I see it.

I like you, Dogbreath, but some times it feels a lot like you are annoyed or angry at me. I have too much of that in my RL, and I don't come here to get more of it.

I found out there are paid positions in the LDS church. I don't know what else need be said.

[ March 29, 2016, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: JanitorBlade ]

Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i think especially if we want to hit some kind of annoyance pressure release valve and start over on the tone that i can mention that what's probably at issue has nothing to do with you being without well meaning intent, nor does it have anything to do with you consciously arguing in bad faith. i have trouble really defining it but it seems to me that what the culprit is is that on certain issues and in specific topics of discussion (i don't know how much of a pattern there is outside of explicitly discussing the mormon church/mormon beliefs, but that's a common theme) ...

where for some reason there's just certain parts of the discussion which get sort of 'blanked' by you, and even exhaustive clarification on the part of the other party just does not translate into you updating how you are viewing and responding to their position. like, just some strange little parts that don't translate or become part of your argument as well, and to an outside observer it is like you are ignoring something the other person is saying repeatedly and you end up arguing with where you thought they were coming from something like two cycles ago, and using points that they have repeatedly addressed and asked you to account for.

i have ended up being on the other end of one of those glitched out 'blanked' subjects of discussion with you, about the subject of when you tried to make an argument of the utility of using respect to coax people out of bigoted or harmful beliefs versus society considering those views toxic and denigrating the people who hold those views. it was kind of weird because you would explain your side, and then i would explain a very important and relevant fact that I and rakeesh and lyrhawn (i think) felt undercut what your position was, but then after each two or three posts it was like a reset button had been hit and you would go back to an essentially unaltered version of the original explanation of your side.

as we are all brain damaged monkeys hammering funny little buttons this is not really an implication of you being distinctly inferior at internet fight 2k16, as nobody except ron lambert is perfect and every last one of us besides him have quirks and dumb shit we do as well. it's just that i think i have seen this before so i notice the pattern?

Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Perhaps the mystery varable is a double condition:

A. The belief in question is a strongly held one.

B. Real life (gross) gets in the way but unlike a mortal earthman who entirely ignores whatever they cannot handle or blows up our near bhuda like IM tries to respond but is not in a place to rearrange his belief structure on the fly.

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I do think that there is a difference between compensated and paid. Parish priests, for the most part, live in rectories, sometimes on their own but often the rectory is shared. They sometimes get a small salary for living expense. Religious priests and nuns usually live communally, owning very little. They get a small stipend for toiletries and so forth. Any more major expense has to be approved.

It is sort of like you wouldn't say an wife who doesn't work outside the home is paid to be a wife although she gets a place to live, food, and so forth.

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
Perhaps the mystery varable is a double condition:

A. The belief in question is a strongly held one.

B. Real life (gross) gets in the way but unlike a mortal earthman who entirely ignores whatever they cannot handle or blows up our near bhuda like IM tries to respond but is not in a place to rearrange his belief structure on the fly.

Handwaving. An essential skill is to reflect on deeply held beliefs in a searching manner.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zlogdanbr
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi,

It is the idiot here. I sincerely apologize for playing the complete fool and being such a reluctant listener to voices of reason albeit discordant. It is the basis of debate to listen well your counterpart and not be contaminated by your own stupid preconceptions.

I apologize for the harsh talk and lack of understanding.

I specially apologize to Dogbreath because as he said I was unfair and completely dismissed his kindness. I apologize to Rakeesh because although he kept remind me I was going down in absolute lack of reason I kept going. I also apologize for other stupid comments.

I am usually not that kind of person.
My rants against the left were completely biased as my country has gone through 13 years of a corrupt ( proven in justice) left government which ruined my country's economy and when I made those comments I let my anger surpass my reason which is something I have always loathed in general. I do not have how to compare the current status here with the American scenario and culture. My comments about the pc-ism and in regard to the influence of Socialist among young Americans was obtuse, stupid and unkind.

I still maintain though that I do not see any hatred coming from OSC, however I absolutely do not dismiss the possibility of being wrong.

After all I was the stupid person that stopped reading my favorite author because I was against one of his opinions once and everyone of you still remain loyal readers even after all the speech you consider wrong coming from OSC.

Regards.

Daniel

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, welcome back! [Smile]
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll welcome him tomorrow, since it's currently April 1st. [Smile]
Posts: 37419 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
I do think that there is a difference between compensated and paid. Parish priests, for the most part, live in rectories, sometimes on their own but often the rectory is shared. They sometimes get a small salary for living expense. Religious priests and nuns usually live communally, owning very little. They get a small stipend for toiletries and so forth. Any more major expense has to be approved.

It is sort of like you wouldn't say an wife who doesn't work outside the home is paid to be a wife although she gets a place to live, food, and so forth.

*nods* There are some differences in usage, to be sure.

I do have a quibble with your example, though. Both culturally and legally, the stay at home wife of your example shares her husband's (or I guess, wife, but for the example let's say husband) income and is entitled to a portion of it. She files income taxes jointly with her husband, her credit (and ability to make purchases) is tied to his, and they share control of his finances. If they divorce, she is entitled to a portion of his income and assets. So in many ways she is being paid for her work at home. The mentality that it's solely her husband's income and not their shared income - and that her husband is furnishing her a place to stay and maybe giving her an allowance at his discretion - is a vestige of outdated cultural beliefs that undervalue stay at home spouses and parents. It's also an incorrect one, both in the eyes of the courts and the IRS. They absolutely do share an income, and she has a legal right to control of that income.

A better example might be a live-in housekeeper or cook. Or in this case, a live-in housekeeper or cook with their own housekeepers, cooks, gardeners, cars, private school tuition for their children...

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I'll welcome him tomorrow, since it's currently April 1st. [Smile]

Meh.

It is remarkably nuanced if it is a joke, though.

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zlogdanbr
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
HEHEHE

It is not a joke I promise.
I did not realize the date until now .

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zlogdanbr
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
thanks for the welcome DB.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
I do think that there is a difference between compensated and paid. Parish priests, for the most part, live in rectories, sometimes on their own but often the rectory is shared. They sometimes get a small salary for living expense. Religious priests and nuns usually live communally, owning very little. They get a small stipend for toiletries and so forth. Any more major expense has to be approved.

It is sort of like you wouldn't say an wife who doesn't work outside the home is paid to be a wife although she gets a place to live, food, and so forth.

*nods* There are some differences in usage, to be sure.

I do have a quibble with your example, though. Both culturally and legally, the stay at home wife of your example shares her husband's (or I guess, wife, but for the example let's say husband) income and is entitled to a portion of it. She files income taxes jointly with her husband, her credit (and ability to make purchases) is tied to his, and they share control of his finances. If they divorce, she is entitled to a portion of his income and assets. So in many ways she is being paid for her work at home. The mentality that it's solely her husband's income and not their shared income - and that her husband is furnishing her a place to stay and maybe giving her an allowance at his discretion - is a vestige of outdated cultural beliefs that undervalue stay at home spouses and parents. It's also an incorrect one, both in the eyes of the courts and the IRS. They absolutely do share an income, and she has a legal right to control of that income.

A better example might be a live-in housekeeper or cook. Or in this case, a live-in housekeeper or cook with their own housekeepers, cooks, gardeners, cars, private school tuition for their children...

I guess I was thinking pre-modern wife. Which was not all that long ago.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
Perhaps the mystery varable is a double condition:

A. The belief in question is a strongly held one.

B. Real life (gross) gets in the way but unlike a mortal earthman who entirely ignores whatever they cannot handle or blows up our near bhuda like IM tries to respond but is not in a place to rearrange his belief structure on the fly.

Handwaving. An essential skill is to reflect on deeply held beliefs in a searching manner.
So you do your soul searching in the middle of being overwhelmed by real life because interWeb people demanded it. [Sarcasm] Because you (Orin) have a rep of being so open minded & easy to convince especially when compared to BB [/sarcasm]
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by zlogdanbr:
Hi,

It is the idiot here. I sincerely apologize for playing the complete fool and being such a reluctant listener to voices of reason albeit discordant. It is the basis of debate to listen well your counterpart and not be contaminated by your own stupid preconceptions.

I apologize for the harsh talk and lack of understanding.

I specially apologize to Dogbreath because as he said I was unfair and completely dismissed his kindness. I apologize to Rakeesh because although he kept remind me I was going down in absolute lack of reason I kept going. I also apologize for other stupid comments.

I am usually not that kind of person.
My rants against the left were completely biased as my country has gone through 13 years of a corrupt ( proven in justice) left government which ruined my country's economy and when I made those comments I let my anger surpass my reason which is something I have always loathed in general. I do not have how to compare the current status here with the American scenario and culture. My comments about the pc-ism and in regard to the influence of Socialist among young Americans was obtuse, stupid and unkind.

I still maintain though that I do not see any hatred coming from OSC, however I absolutely do not dismiss the possibility of being wrong.

After all I was the stupid person that stopped reading my favorite author because I was against one of his opinions once and everyone of you still remain loyal readers even after all the speech you consider wrong coming from OSC.

Regards.

Daniel

Nice to see you back. [Smile]
Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
So you do your soul searching in the middle of being overwhelmed by real life because interWeb people demanded it. [Sarcasm] Because you (Orin) have a rep of being so open minded & easy to convince especially when compared to BB [/sarcasm]

Ok, I'll bite. Orincoro has a reputation for being obstinate or close minded?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In the past he has been a trouble maker...and in a direct comparison to BB?

Very similar to comparing Parkour to Lyr...

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zlogdanbr
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I'll welcome him tomorrow, since it's currently April 1st. [Smile]

It is April 2 :-)
It was not a joke, but I admit it could a in certain way look like one.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was joking yesterday about welcoming you today. Still, it's good to see you again. [Smile]
Posts: 37419 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
In the past he has been a trouble maker...and in a direct comparison to BB?

Very similar to comparing Parkour to Lyr...

They're both interesting and intelligent people who I wished posted here more?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Sarcasm]Yup...you nailed it! [/sarcasm] [Hat]
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heisenberg
Member
Member # 13004

 - posted      Profile for Heisenberg           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'd be more likely to call the oversensitive, passive aggressive manchild the troublemaker, but hey, opinions.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's not talk about which of us is more or less openminded. I like Orincoro a lot.
Posts: 1171 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Real critics like myself, instead of mindless leftaliban conformists, remember the REAL reasons why people go to watch movies -- because we are really bad at getting tickets to bad zack snyder movies in time
Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
there was so much unintentional hilarity in that article

Is that what I'm going to be like when I'm old and I lose my final marble

Posts: 15417 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Who is the "...oversensitive, passive aggressive manchild..." I'm honestly unsure who is being referred to.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heisenberg
Member
Member # 13004

 - posted      Profile for Heisenberg           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
Let's not talk about which of us is more or less openminded. I like Orincoro a lot.

Me too. [Smile] Which is why I expressed confusion at comparing him negatively to you. (To be clear: Because you're both pretty rad dudes, not because I think it's an insult to be compared to you)
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
narrativium
Member
Member # 3230

 - posted      Profile for narrativium           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
bad zack snyder movies

Redundant.
Posts: 1357 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So I guess I'm supposed to go ape nuts now?

Nah.

Heya Hisenburg...that's not cool man.

[ April 03, 2016, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Stone_Wolf_ ]

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
there was so much unintentional hilarity in that article

Is that what I'm going to be like when I'm old and I lose my final marble

What is interesting to me is this is the second or third time he's printed the lie about Obama and the Churchill bust:

"Considering that President Zero’s first act in office was to insult Britain by returning a bust of Churchill – a man who accomplished more to benefit civilization even when he was wrong than Obama has accomplished in his entire tenure in office – that had been given to the White House as a gift many years before.

Yeah, that’s right, slap our best ally in the face by, in effect, spitting on their prime minister who led"

Because this is such a blatantly false (and easily fact checked) claim.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/27/fact-check-bust-winston-churchill

"
Lately, there’s been a rumor swirling around about the current location of the bust of Winston Churchill. Some have claimed that President Obama removed the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office and sent it back to the British Embassy.

Now, normally we wouldn’t address a rumor that’s so patently false, but just this morning the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer repeated this ridiculous claim in his column. He said President Obama “started his Presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office.”

This is 100% false. The bust still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room."

I mean, there are frigging pictures of it. It's still there. Aren't there better lies to repeat? It's gotten to the point where you can't trust anything he writes because he's liable to be quite literally just making shit up. Or at least, willfully choosing to believe and repeat whatever outlandish claim he hears about Obama without doing even cursory fact checking.

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Washington Post wrote out the whole storyof the bust(s), the agreement, the timing, and the subsequent confusion.

Every now and then one of his columns pops up again in my various feeds and against my better judgement I read them again because this man's work had a strong influence on me. Much of it still does, years later. And his reviews are often funny, perceptive, and informative.

I can't do it any more. I just can't. He's become the bitter old relative who can no longer be argued with regardless of actual, provable fact. Even reviews with no political topic at all get anti-"Leftist" rants shoved in and I have to turn away. I don't even reread his older work as much, love it though I do, because hints of future attitudes are starting to show through for me on rereadings and I don't want to give up those memories.

Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well not that I was feeling bad, but I'm feeling validated by regarding OSC as a hack nowadays.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chris Bridges:
The Washington Post wrote out the whole storyof the bust(s), the agreement, the timing, and the subsequent confusion.

What's kind of sad is that Ted Cruz was vague and weasely enough in his phrasing to come close to not technically lying, whereas OSC was specific enough to call it the "bust of Churchill given many years before" as opposed to the one the British loaned to Bush for the duration of his administration, which he then returned when he left office. So he doesn't even have that to fall back on.

Also: Hi Chris! Nice to see you. [Wave]

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Heinlein turned into a sex fiend...GRRM turned into a torturer...OSC turned into bigot.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  ...  35  36  37   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2