3
Piroko 3 points ago +5 / -2

He's just blowing money on random shit to stave off the depression.

I've never met a depressed person with a pilot's license. Just sayin.

7
Piroko 7 points ago +7 / -0

I have had a girl who could not be more than 13 randomly jump twoward me and announce 'I'm transgender!'.

I'm a truck.

AUTOBOTS, ASSEMBLE!

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fuck your sola fide.

Sola actus.

Make the paradise, don't just talk about it. The stupidity of sola fide is half of why the world is so fucked up right now.

4
Piroko 4 points ago +4 / -0

Dood we already know how to make oil from cellulose. It's just not very efficient.

-4
Piroko -4 points ago +4 / -8

U mad its not u?

4
Piroko 4 points ago +4 / -0

"Greeting friend, do you wish to look as happy as me? Well, you've got the power inside you right now. So use it, and send 1 dollar to happy dude. 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield."

3
Piroko 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Gib monies" -p9, every time we let him into Goomswarm's diplo chat in EVE

4
Piroko 4 points ago +5 / -1

Mmmmm in London I still believe it's ultimately about wealth.

Linking it to eco cars WILL NOT meaningfully reduce traffic in the CCZ, it'll just increase eco car ownership in the CCZ.

Sooner or later, someone at TfL and the GLA will have to bite it and say "no private cars, period", and the rich will get them fired. Saying just eco cars is just staving it off a few more years.

3
Piroko 3 points ago +6 / -3

The suggestion I'm proposing was seriously floated back when the Congestion Charge Zone was initially proposed twenty years ago.

The fact that the CCZ failed to achieve adequate reductions in traffic vindicate the arguments for more absolute measures.

Linking it to environmentalism is just a carve out to placate the rich so THEY can drive in the inner ring, when it would be fairer and more effective to go for a total private vehicle ban in the inner ring.

6
Piroko 6 points ago +8 / -2

They do. They're contriving a reason to make it even harsher because it didn't do enough.

In the end, they just need to ban all private cars in the inner ring. It's just not built for them.

7
Piroko 7 points ago +9 / -2

I'm from Iowa.

I'm gonna describe for you the London Inner Ring.

The inner ring encloses an area stretching from Westminster to Barbican, Marylebone to Southwark. It's roughly 2 miles in diameter, and maybe 3 square miles in area.

Most of those streets were set down and plotted out before America existed. It has been congested with so much traffic, for so long, that they've been digging under it for a hundred and fifty years. There are over thirty subway stations inside the inner ring. At any point inside there, you are never more than about 900 feet (3 football fields) walking distance to a subway.

Most of the streets are narrow enough that you can EITHER have two lanes OR one lane and parking. Short of burning the whole area down and condemning the land it cannot be fixed.

The only solution is to say "no fucking cars, period", which is what they'll eventually have to do.

Saying "no fucking GAS cars" is just staving off the inevitable for another couple years.

-4
Piroko -4 points ago +2 / -6

That's not who this fight would be between.

Do you remember the DC riots? Not the stupid inauguration one, I mean the ones when Trump was in office and people were burning shit.

If, in victory, we push for retaliatory action against the instigators of this plot, the democratic politicians and policy makers, they will screech like Palpatine that "The Jedi are taking over!" and the SJWs will leap in and burn shit like the stupid Anakins they are.

I have no doubt that we will, in this election cycle, absolutely demolish the democratic party.

I also have no doubt that the GOP will use that victory to... go after abortion hard (this time with a vindictive cruelty of trying to own the libs), provoking a backlash that costs them the Congress again no later than 2026.

0
Piroko 0 points ago +1 / -1

Way to miss the point.

My point was not to say anything about them. It was entirely about you.

I just want them to pray to God and learn from their mistakes. I can't save them, only He can. They have been led astray.

From my perspective, both you and I refused the vaccine for selfish reasons. In that much we were not serving the good. Neither you nor I can offer a single word of defense on that one choice that would matter to St Peter. If you think otherwise, I think you're wrong.

-1
Piroko -1 points ago +1 / -2

I don't exactly lose sleep over the theoretical harm my selfishness about not getting a frigging flu shot may have caused.

I just bring it up because it really, really irritates me when protestants think god is on their side about actions which I can clearly see are not selfless.

I don't like the SJWs. I think they're power hungry and myopic. Their plans always backfire for plainly obvious reasons. But at the end of the day I have to concede that their actions at face value could come from a selfless frame of mind. And I have to admit the same is true about the pro-vax crowd. It is entirely possible, likely even, that they are well meaning. That they are "pursuing the good as they see it" as Jordan Peterson would say.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

But there is no community benefit because it is non-sterilizing...

That was only known after the fact by discovery.

The transgression against the community occurred much earlier, when the vaccine was initially introduced.

Y'see, unlike y'all hypocrite protestants who think god saves ya cuz you just believe he will, over here in the friends we actually care about volition and intentions.

I can't say with a clear conscience that I refused the vaccine for reasons that served the community. It was entirely self serving.

-1
Piroko -1 points ago +1 / -2

By the community-before-self reasoning of the Religious Society of Friends...

Yes.

0
Piroko 0 points ago +1 / -1

you escape

Why the fuck would I do that?

your entire family

Dood, if you knew the details of my family, you'd want them dead too.

Hell, there's a good chance you probably do.

If I'd played ball twenty years ago, I have the familial connections in the Democratic Party to probably be a representative today. Instead I have a MAGA cap and I'm not welcome at Grandma's christmas party.

C'est la vie.

-2
Piroko -2 points ago +1 / -3

Mmmmmm you don't want to go theological on this one.

Y'see I'm Quaker, that alien bastard child of christianity that somehow manages to be more Marxist than Marx. We've got this thing about putting community ahead of self and taking on personal obligation to serve others.

From a theological perspective, I was being "a bad christian" by being a holdout on vaccination.

I don't judge other people for choosing to not get vaccinated.

But I will criticize the everloving fuck out of christians who think that god is on their side on this one. The SJWs are the well meaning ones here, crazy and power hungry though they may be, their motivation comes from a better place, to save as many as they can. Perhaps unreasonably, perhaps shortsightedly, but make no mistake, in the final analysis we're the selfish ones.

-8
Piroko -8 points ago +1 / -9

You:

I don't have a bloodlust.

Also you:

They didn't repent.

In my experience the second the word repent comes up, the speaker in question is skirting the fact that they won't actually be satisfied until they get their own reign of terror in retaliation.

-12
Piroko -12 points ago +2 / -14

If the vaccine passport is dead then any system predicated on it is dead by extension.

You and MM have a bloodlust about you that's not productive. When the other side throws down arms, the war is over. You don't go pushing for another hunger game to make a point.

I'd expect a Brit to understand that seeing as how you guys fucked up the Treaty of Versailles a hundred years ago by pushing for revenge.

-13
Piroko -13 points ago +1 / -14

Okay this attitude right here, this is what turned the Treaty of Versailles into "an armistice for twenty years" as General Fock put it.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›