undergroundoverground
@undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
- Comment on To all you outside of the US... 1 day ago:
We did but then you lot started ringing bells.
Tbf, were fucked too.
- Comment on Looks like something straight from Warhammer 40K 4 days ago:
For sure, I totally agree with what you’re saying. I was only using the word in the 40k version where nearly everything is hersasy, not the sensible version of the word youre using.
- Comment on Looks like something straight from Warhammer 40K 4 days ago:
Something I always love to add to these sorts of threads:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Nine_Angles
It expresses the view that the current aeonic civilization is that of the Western world, but it claims that the evolution of this society is threatened by the “Magian/Nazarene” influence of the Judeo-Christian religion, which the Order seeks to combat in order to establish a militaristic new social order, which it calls the “Imperium”. According to Order teachings, this is necessary in order for a galactic civilization to form, in which “Aryan” society will colonise the Milky Way.
It’s beyond heresy.
- Comment on Economics 5 days ago:
They were half serious and an elaborate ruse. You see, I dont actually subscribe to neoclassical ideology. Crazy huh? Are words wild?
All the people who understood what was going on and voted on it. Youre the only person who’s had a problem here and needed it all explained to you, in little bits. Just you, on your own.
As opposed to a big man who calls people a coward from safely behind their keyboard? Grow up.
No, i thought you had poor social skills and, as such, I couldn’t be bothered with you. It turns out, you were even more bitter and poorly socialised than I though you were which is really saying something.
However, youre right about one thing at least, although you didn’t say it directly. Much like everyone else in your life I, should’ve just ignored you.
- Comment on Economics 5 days ago:
Lol sure, as you can tell from my comments here, I was being deadly serious the whole time.
Youre the one who got all weird. Everyone else could tell I was joking around. I even let you know my intention wasn’t to be rude and that it seems to have been taken the wrong way.
You’re the problem here.
- Comment on Economics 5 days ago:
I definitely made one but it seems to have come across wrong or rude. That wasn’t my intention.
- Comment on Economics 6 days ago:
Lol exactly, no one.
The first rule of colonisation is to make the colonised pay for their own colonisation.
- Comment on Economics 6 days ago:
So close: “tax breaks, for the rich.” If poor people stop paying tax too, whos going to pay to enforce enforce all the exploitation and wealth extraction done by the rich?
- Comment on the truth 1 week ago:
After blast off, the static T forms a new a new acronym of evil with the infamous L, G and B.
Wake up sheeple.
- Comment on Economics 1 week ago:
I think you know as well as I do that your honesty and integrity in describing how people are being fucked over by this process excludes you from neoclassical economics. Its always easy to catch out the fakers.
I mean, how am I supposed to justify tax breaks for the rich with that?
- Comment on Economics 1 week ago:
Its okay, as I neoclassical economist, I know exactly how to fix this issue.
Tax breaks for the rich.
- Comment on CEO pay is rising faster than it has in a decade — and 3 times as fast as worker wages 1 week ago:
Well yeah, the real power (capital) is making even more money from their work. Of course they’ll pay them for being better at it. Its cheaper to pay CEOs more to be horrible than it is to pay people more.
Capital is the problem and shareholders are delighted when anyone takes out their anger on CEOs. I mean, its part of what they pay them for.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 1 week ago:
You did claim to have voted left all before this. If not labour, who was it?
The idea that “the left” want immigration is a right wing trope, full of racism. They just presume they want more as “immigrants vote left” which is statically untrue. Its a mix, as we import conservative types too.
So, with that in mind, who actaully benefits from mass immigration? Its not labour or the people they represent. So, who is it that benefits from mass lowering of wages and increased housing prices due to the manufactured housing crisis?
Well, anyone should be able to figure out that it’s the wealthy and their business interests who benefit and they’re represented by the right. Always have been.
I don’t think we will
Being able to work less and not having to toil all day for someone else’s gain is a left wing idea. Theres no world where the right get in and we work less. In fact, everything they do is to make non-rich people work more, for less.
I care about the people who live here and not symbols or fake, fairytale history that gets weaponised and used to make people vote against their own self interest. I care to save our NHS from the very same corporate interests you want to vote for. But you’d be happy to lose even more of your life to work and our NHS, if the right wing (who benefit the most and have presided over the most immigration ever) end immigration which would be impossible and they would never do anyway.
I mean, what am I supposed to say to that?
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 1 week ago:
The reason we have such hight immigration is because companies have been allowed to run roughshod over our immigration system. All they have to do is float some job adverts and they can pretend there’s a skill shortage. Corporatists have done this to stop wages from going up. I image we agree roughly so far.
Labour want a points based system and a central body overlooking what actually is a skill shortage and whats a lie. Immigration will go down, as soon as you don’t have corporatists in charge.
Haven’t you found it funny how reform get so much airtime, despite having only one, solitary councillor in the whole of the UK? I mean, the greens have nearly 1,000 but we don’t hear a peep out of them on the big news stations. Yet reform are all 9ver the place.
Anyway, in completely unrelated news I’m sure, reform are looking to gut our NHS and they’re getting huge backing, support and platforming by the lobby groups who are lickling their lips and circling like vultures hoping to gorge themselves on tax payer money and the death our NHS may be driven to by the tories.
I had a glace at your link and I think we agree on lots of things. I’m sad to see that you’ve been convinced that we would ever be allowed to work less, under right wing governments. Theyre the driving force of immigration, lowered wages and cut services. There’s nothing to suggest labour won’t reduce immigration, other than the wild declarations and made up stories of people who would never vote labour anyway.
Youre trying to fuck your way to virginity.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 2 weeks ago:
Don’t worry, no one here is as thick as you. Apparently, a points based system and banning companies who abuse the system is too vague and hard to understand for some of us.
“The boats” are a drop in the bucket compared to legal immigration, all cheered on by right wing corporatists. Its just a banner to distract morons.
So, what left leaving policy did they have? Remember, you had some hilarious claims about needing economic lefty-ness before. So, they must have something. I mean, it can’t just be about immigration when all those factors that won you over would be included in a points based system?
Lol, we both know its not about the fine detail. Its about dog whistling.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 2 weeks ago:
My mind is open. Its just youre taking a load of bollocks, is all. Its really not my fault you’re trying to sell these whoppers.
I’ll show you how it doesn’t hold up:
Exaclty who are “the left” here and what isn’t going far enough, that reform has gone far enough on? Don’t be light on the detail or just declare wide sweeping BS and you should find the root of the problem.
- Comment on Now I'm hungry 2 weeks ago:
…well, technically that would be considered a ceremony of sorts.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 2 weeks ago:
To normalise the idea that people who once voted "for the left ^^^tm " now voting for a hard right reform party. Because you’re bored. Because it seemed funny. Who knows, why does anyone lie?
So, as “the left” aren’t meeting your left wing economic planning expectations, you decided to go with a party who have NO left leaning economic plans. Well, id love to hear how you plan to square that circle.
Of course I can accept that people have different opinions to me. What a silly thing to say. No, sadly, its that it sounds like bollocks and it doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny, is all.
- Comment on Anon is stuck in a rut 3 weeks ago:
He should sell his instant work-teleportation device for money instead of working
- Comment on Anon is stuck in a rut 3 weeks ago:
I mean if anything, surely that justifies their claim of wage slavery even more no?
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 3 weeks ago:
Course you did and it’s their fault youre voting farrage too…
“Da left” haven’t done anything at all, seeing as they haven’t been in power for over 2 decades. Thats why your claim makes no sense.
Oh, it makes you send a message alright. Although, its not the one you think you’re sending.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 3 weeks ago:
Its not surprising, considering the disproportional amount of airtime news stations like sky and the BBC keep giving them.
I mean, they have 1 councilor and so much coverage. The green party have over 300 and you’ll never hear a peep out of them from the right wing client media or the compromised BBC.
- Comment on Reform UK pulls to within two points of Tories in latest YouGov poll 3 weeks ago:
As wonderful a sweeping statement as “the left have lost their mind” (said no one who would ever vote left ever) is, its pretty laughable that anyone thinks the corporatist reform party would ever actually lower immigration.
I mean, literally all of the left leaning parties have said they will lower immigration but don’t let that ruin the narrative.
- Comment on Employees Who Stay In Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less 3 weeks ago:
Classic trek.
The saddest part is that I really thought we had the potential to become the federation. It turns out, we were always just the farengi.
- Comment on UK clothing sales to EU plummet as Brexit red tape deters exporters 3 weeks ago:
As was always the plan, the very rich and powerful are the only people who benefited from brexit.
- Comment on Anon gets unwanted attention 4 weeks ago:
That would be closer to a doctor department for humans no?
- Comment on Anon gets unwanted attention 4 weeks ago:
For sure and for me, i think the best way to think of it is if there was a department called “computer resource department.” No ones is going to convince themselves that its there for the benefit of the computers, as its clearly there to get as much profitability out of them as possible.
- Comment on Anon figures out how dieting works 4 weeks ago:
Again, not 100 calories above bass rate. Its not hard. You just have to accept that you’re fundamentally wrong, as the data shows. I’ll make it easier, its not 100 calories over what you burn, just to stay alive.
Based on the data you completely misssunderstood, we could “prove” almost anything.
Pretty much, thats why the only data that you think agrees with you had to be wildly misread. We are incredibly efficient at moving while preserving energy, hence the whole persistence hunters thing you keep trying to ignore, despite its obvious effects on our metabolic pathways and this discussion.
Lol, so, if I don’t go to the gym, I don’t know how excersise works but if I do, I’m only speaking gym science. Youre hilarious! You didn’t even know what glycogen was. Behave yourself. I know you didn’t because all the people that do know what it is don’t beleive the baseless old wives tale you beleive. I won’t go any deeper than gymbro science because you clearly can’t understand anything deeper than that.
Let’s pretend you weren’t wildly misreading what they said, even then, this is about weight loss and inducing fat metabolising pathways. Youre struggling on the calories part alone and we haven’t even got the the metabolic pathways that also don’t agree with you.
Theres a reason you had to reach so far and look so long for something you had to misread, in order to argue you point.
- Comment on Anon figures out how dieting works 4 weeks ago:
5 to freaking 10???
Above bass rate metabolism, yes. They didn’t adjust the data for that and you didn’t bother to consider what was being said to you.
I hit the gym regularly, pal! Even then, me going or not has no bearing on this. Youre just being silly now.
Compared to controls without exercise, aerobic training was consistently found to be effective on weight loss, which was not the case for resistance training.7
This is just hilarious. If you look at reference 7, what they’re quoting, you’ll see its about stopping muscle atrophy in people in people on calorie reduced diets. They used resistance training to keep the weight up, via stopping muscle atrophy.
And, again, you choose to ignore the bits you don’t like:
…Although the effect on weight and fat loss is of relatively small magnitude.
Like I said, its little to no effect. Its just BS pushed by food lobby groups and people who don’t understand bio chem.
- Comment on Anon figures out how dieting works 4 weeks ago:
I agree, its not magic. Its you making up numbers and refusing to accept that glycogen exists. Probably because you don’t know anything about it while massively over estimating your knowledge of bio chem.
Its not 80 - 140. Its like 5 -10 at best. Again, you epically over estimate the calorie burning effect of excersise, above bass rate, that cardio does. Its why its called cardiovascular and not weight loss excersise, just fyi, due to the fundamental lack of evidence proving it to cause weight loss. Funny that…
I mean, you might have a point, if insulin and glucagon didn’t exist. However, they do. So, that ends that really. Well, it does it you understand metabolism.
There is also evidence to support the notion that individuals who are less physically active are more likely to gain weight over time than those who exercise between 150 and 300 min/week
Doesn’t mean exceraise makes people lose weight. It could also mean people who do no excersise often eat more too. They would have said this in their report themselves. Dont just read what you want to from things.
Although exercise contributes to multiple health benefits, and most of the research suggests that it can play a role in both short- and long-term weight loss and weight maintenance, patients often have a difficult time engaging in a regular exercise program and continuing that program as a lifestyle modification.
It CAN, as in, in their opinion some of the research potentially could indicate that. But its not conclusive, as I keep saying. You just read what you wanted from that.
Consistently performing exercise of a duratio er than the basic recommendations for health (150 min/week of moderate-intensity exercise) does appear to be more likely to contribute to weight loss and weight maintenance efforts over the long term
So, again, one that might “appear” to maybe actually agree with you and you ignored all the rest. Well the ones you didn’t choose to missread that is.
Even then, they’re very tentative and say its more likely, not something like “the evidence shows”, as the evidence does show that. Again again, this so far beyond confirmation bias. If you want to die on this hill of no evidence and feeling like you can out run bad diet (which would have to be true, if it worked to way you’re claiming it does), then more fool you.
Its not magic but it would be, if it worked how you seem to think it does. Behold, the magical persistence hunters who evolved to be able to run themselves to a starvation induced death.
You can’t argue with that kind of “logic.”