Fail Quotes

[Travis Retriever]

And my mom just can't let her gourmet bling/health food crap bogosity go.
I note that not only have I *not* been starving (*rolls eyes*) but I have not lost weight and even gained some weight.  Her response?
"Because of the white rice?"
*facepalms* No, because I wasn't in a caloric deficit.
I'll quote Armi Legge's article on Clean Eating: http://evidencemag.com/clean-eating/
"There is also no evidence that certain foods will accelerate fat loss at the same calorie intake, or that other foods will slow down or prevent fat loss. You could eat 43% of your calories from table sugar and still lose just as much fat as someone who only consumed 4% of their calories from sugar.⁹²"

92. Surwit RS, Feinglos MN, McCaskill CC, et al. Metabolic and behavioral effects of a high-sucrose diet during weight loss. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;65(4):908–915. Available at: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/65/4/908.full.pdf

Further strengthening those results was the use of DXA to measure body composition.  Sorry, but "empty calories" or "food stripped of its nutrients" or whatever you call it cannot override a Caloric Deficit.  We have over a century of weight loss research backing this up:  http://evidencemag.com/why-calories-count/
The truth is, you could get shredded eating nothing but HFCS and/or pure glucose deep fried in synthetic trans fats (or whatever other culinary bogeymen are currently in vogue).  Granted, you probably wouldn't enjoy that diet but in terms of *just* weight loss, Calories are all that matters.

In short, I do my homework on this stuff.  All these Armchair McExperts are NOT going to bluff their way through this.

[ArtemisVale]

This is Thunderf00t's comment in Stefan Molyneux's video defending adam carolla

"sigh... hard core libertarians.
Everything is the boogie man cos its 'coercive redistribution of wealth' see 50:00
Kids cost ~ half a million dollars to raise/ feed/ educate etc.
Thats a necessary burden of society in that if there are no kids, our species is dead.
Its an overhead you cannot get around.
And you would be all in favour of not GIVING women $10 a month of birth control pills to ensure that a ~$500 000 of costs is handed in a more controlled manner.
For an someone who talks so much about economics, you sure cant spot a false economy.
...or lets take something else. How about the police force? Are you in favour of 'coercive redistribution of wealth' when it comes to ensuring an optimum level of security? If so then your whole argument about 'coercive redistribution of wealth' becomes moot as it can equally well be a good or a bad thing. It also means you have sat here demonomizing someone because of an irrelevance, where what you should really have been focusing on is ....is it better for society.
If you think there is no optimal level of 'coercive redistribution' funded policing, then isnt somalia your dream society?"

You know i think we need a little more 'coercive slavery' in this country. If you don't like it then you can go to somolia

[Travis Retriever]

This is Thunderf00t's comment in Stefan Molyneux's video defending adam carolla

You know i think we need a little more 'coercive slavery' in this country. If you don't like it then you can go to somolia

GG thunderf00t, the Somolia bit has been debunked and refuted scores of times.  More PRATT territory.

[Travis Retriever]

IIRC, Dr. Oz IS a neurologist, one of the best in the country if you believe his PR. Or at least he was before Oprah.

Actually, I think he was a cardiologist and heart surgeon...doesn't make his bogosity any less bogus.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

http://lordthawkeye.deviantart.com/journal/A-case-of-a-guilty-conscience-405158014
This loon just doesn't know when to quit.  Declares himself a winner and has the nerve to bitch at ME about name calling.
Good lord I hate leftists, far far FAR more than I'll ever hate righties.  At least republicans give me some common courtesy when I talk to them unlike these unwashed neanderthals.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

"Libertarians and anti-government extremists like the billionaire Koch brothers clearly have no idea how hard it is to make it into the American middle class and stay there.

Thanks to Being Liberal."
I agree with Hawkeye. Leftist are worst.

[Ibrahim90]

"Libertarians and anti-government extremists like the billionaire Koch brothers clearly have no idea how hard it is to make it into the American middle class and stay there.

Thanks to Being Liberal."
I agree with Hawkeye. Leftist are worst.

it's not that hard (it isn't easy either): work, save money, don't fuck around.

Government should stay out of the way in the meantime, so as to facilitate the process.

[AnCap Dave]

Not sure how many people follow The Legend of Korra, but I'm adding this recent arc as a Fail Quote.

The villains of this arc are the stereotype of anarchists who just want to bring chaos despite talking a good game of freedom and peace. In the latest episode, they just took down a queen and of course they set it up so that the people start rioting and looting to show the "immediate chaos" that anarchy brings.

What kills me is, this series, and even the prior series The Last Airbender has shown how evil the state can be, which even included genocide of an entire race of people at the hands of a Fire Nation.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

Not sure how many people follow The Legend of Korra, but I'm adding this recent arc as a Fail Quote.

The villains of this arc are the stereotype of anarchists who just want to bring chaos despite talking a good game of freedom and peace. In the latest episode, they just took down a queen and of course they set it up so that the people start rioting and looting to show the "immediate chaos" that anarchy brings.

What kills me is, this series, and even the prior series The Last Airbender has shown how evil the state can be, which even included genocide of an entire race of people at the hands of a Fire Nation.

Spoiler alert.
Its not the first time Avatar has done something like this. In the comic The Search, Its revealed that Zuko isn't the son of Ozai, and the team throws a fit about how this would restart the war.

[tnu]

im anarchist I am anti government and anti capitalist. I hate politicians and capitalist passionately.

politicians administer the state. the state being the violence that allows one person to own property that they do not interact with e.g. a house 100 miles away and extract rents from. capitalist had never existed without a state.

cartels are long acknowledge to occur in capitalism, adam smith even noted this.

competition. ancaps pretend that in a stateless society and with private armed forced under control of capitalists they would not use the force to remove competition. This is an image of a dead competing drug dealers

the private ownership of the means of production, has existed with a state. infact it is the state which enforces the exclusive rights of that private ownership.

no i am not, I am an anarchist. anarchy meaning without rulers. capitalism means that capitalist dominate the non property owners. as in a privately owned world one has to jump through the hoops of capitalist to access the means of life that are privately owned. and government means a violent force that can throw you in jail or take you to war.

I hate both.

because in late stage capitalism capitalists capture the state entirely.

surely i do not have to define "the rich" for you. Taxation goes to pay the police force. the police are who comes and evicts people, say a family if they can not pay rent to the landlord. Without a state property could not become a commodity where little pieces of paper can be traded meaning the holder of the paper has restrictive control over property miles away they may never interact with.

capitalism is violence, violence is what is require for someone to control property they do not interact with and force the occupiers to pay rent or be evicted.

and no not paying rent is not violating the NAP as no landlords has been rush to hospital for not having rent paid to them. How ever police eviction a family because they lost their job etc is.

capitalism is a product of statism, as the state is what uphold private property.

capitalism is about the private ownership of the means of production, meaning if people try and use the property of the capitalist without paying them what they demand the state violence forces them off. Capitalism is violence.

who enforces private property? the state. sure the private owners decide what to do with the property. not disputing that, how ever i am point out the reality is it the police that enforces their exclusive control.

Anarcho-Capitalists must thus alter the argument as follows.

1) Theft is the forceful taking of another person's justly acquired property

2) Capitalist private property is legitimate

3) Expropriation is the compulsory taking of a capitalist's private property by the workers

4) Given 1-3 expropriation is a form of theft.

A anarchist can respond to this argument by denying (2) and thus if (2) is false it follows that a anarchist can accept the N.A.P while simultaneously advocating expropriation. Therefore, Anarcho-Capitalists are mistaken if they believe that they need only convince Anarchist of the truth of the N.A.P because a anarchist may accept its truth while denying the legitimacy of private property and so rejecting the Anarcho-Capitalist position. Rather, if Anarcho-Capitalists are to defend their position they must convince anarchist that private property is legitimate. If they do not the N.A.P is of no use to a defender of capitalism and is irrelevant to arguments for the morality or immorality of expropriation.

apitalism is all about take the fruit of other people's labour away, in a privately owned world someone must sell the only thing they have for a wage, themselves. to be able to access the means of life off the property owning class.

the wage worker must produce more value their what their wage could pay for, if they did not it would not be profit for the capitalist. in that sense the fruit of their labour is not their own buy taken by the capitalist and a % of it give back in the form of a wage. then a large part of that wage is given to their landlord. who sits with a piece of paper that means if they worker does not pay rent the police will make them homeless with the use of violence.

[BlameThe1st]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/libertarian-fantasies/

Oh look: Paul Krugman is yet again writing another screed against libertarianism. I wonder if he will at least have anything new to say? Perhaps he will finally pose a new argument that no other statist has ever regurgitated for the umpteenth time.

When it comes to substance, libertarians are living in a fantasy world. Often that's quite literally true: Paul Ryan thinks that we're living in an Ayn Rand novel. More to the point, however, the libertarian vision of the society we actually have bears little resemblance to reality.

Or not.

Mike Konczal takes on a specific example: the currently trendy idea among libertarians that we can make things much better by replacing the welfare state with a basic guaranteed income.

Uh, never heard that argued by a libertarian. Sounds more like a statist policy to me. We libertarians simply believe that private voluntary organizations will move in to replace the welfare state. This isn't exactly a fantasy. In fact, mutual aid societies were the norm (with some providing a year's worth of healthcare for one day's wages!) until government stepped in.

And what Konczal says about welfare is also true, although harder to quantify, for regulation. For sure there are wasteful and unnecessary government regulations — but not nearly as many as libertarians want to believe. When, for example, meddling bureaucrats tell you what you can and can't have in your dishwashing detergent, it turns out that there's a very good reason. America in 2014 is not India under the License Raj.

No unnecessary regulations? Good grief. Someone show Krugman the latest edition of Ten Thousand Commandments. And I think most food trucks, hair stylists, beer-brewing companies, and car sharing services would disagree with him there. These small businesses are being hampered through regulation at the benefit of larger businesses.

In other words, libertarianism is a crusade against problems we don't have, or at least not to the extent the libertarians want to imagine.

Pay no attention to the drug war, police militarization, victimless crimes, monetary inflation, internet censorship, or other examples of big government that are apparent to anyone who reads the daily news.

Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the case of monetary policy, where many libertarians are determined to stop the Fed from irresponsible money-printing — which is not, in fact, something it's doing.

Dude, have you noticed how far the value of our dollar has dropped since the Fed was first instituted? Or since the Gold Standard was repealed? Pretty damn far. Yeah, you scratch your head and wonder why wages have stagnated or why prices have risen or why Americans can no longer afford the same things that there parents or grandparents once could under their same circumstances. Inflation is why, you dimbulb!

[ArtemisVale]

^maybe this could be the subject of a hawkeye vid. It could be like top 11 AnCom arguments

Also *screams in pillow at the stupidity and assholeness*

[BlameThe1st]

"Libertarians and anti-government extremists like the billionaire Koch brothers clearly have no idea how hard it is to make it into the American middle class and stay there.

Thanks to Being Liberal."
I agree with Hawkeye. Leftist are worst.

Someone do me a favor and post this link in the comments of that stupid cartoon: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/magazine/summer-2013/billionaires-self-made

One of the papers presented at the recent annual meeting of the American Economic Association focused on the 400 richest individuals in the country ranked by Forbes magazine. The paper, "Family, Education, and Sources of Wealth Among the Richest Americans, 1982—2012," by Chicago Booth Professor Steven Neil Kaplan and Joshua Rauh of Stanford, found that fewer of those who made it on to the Forbes 400 list in recent years grew up wealthy than in previous decades.

Some 32 percent of the Forbes 400 in 2011 belonged to very rich families, down from 60 percent in 1982. On the other hand, the share of those in the Forbes 400 who didn't grow up wealthy but had some money in the family—the equivalent of the upper middle class—rose by the about same amount. The proportion of those in the list who grew up poor or had little wealth remained constant at roughly 20 percent throughout the same period.

Most individuals on the Forbes 400 list did not inherit the family business but rather made their own fortune. Kaplan and Rauh found that 69 percent of those on the list in 2011 started their own business, compared with only 40 percent in 1982. In other words, there are fewer people on the Forbes 400 list who came from an affluent background and eventually took over the family business, such as brothers David and Charles Koch (Koch Industries) and the Walton siblings (Wal-Mart), and more self-made people such as Bill Gates (Microsoft), Warren Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway), Philip Knight (Nike), and Stephen Schwarzman (Blackstone Group), who had an upper middle-class upbringing and eventually built their own successful companies.

Kaplan and Rauh also looked at the industries the Forbes 400 belonged to. They found that between 1982 and 2011 many more individuals involved in retail, restaurants, computer technology, and private finance—including hedge funds and private equity—entered the list than before, while fewer were in real estate and energy. Technology has become more important even in companies outside the computer industry—25.5 percent of the businesses run by the Forbes 400 in 2011 incorporated technology in their companies, up from 7.3 percent in 1982.

[Travis Retriever]

What bullshit.  Drug Cartels are only a thing because of government prohibition of drugs.  Or as a result of GOVERNMENT policy.  I mean, what, do Budweiser and the other beer companies get into firefights with their competitors? No, but Al Capone did during the era of alcohol prohibition.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Don't need a vid, just this.

*Shows pictures of victims of drone strikes and other bombings by the US*

Statists: Collateral damage!

I rest my case.  If you're gonna play the moral outrage game, go for gold or go home folks.