Aww, that's too bad.
Maybe someday you'll be able to afford some and be as cool as me.
I have a pair of $200(Beyer DT-150) headphones and a pair of $100(Alessandro MS-1) headphones, and I keep them at home. When I go out, I bring my IEMs. Passive sound canceling and decent sound quality without amplification for the win?
I was kind enough to include the above paragraph since you appear to be interested in pointless pissing contests.
Kanon is listed as having an Android version; alas, it's Japanese. If only I could only learn Japanese like Neo learned kung fu in the Matrix I'd be happy :smile.gif: So many good looking VNs that aren't translated *sigh*
Visual Novel Database - great resource for finding out what's out there and what format/lang.
This reminds me, I need to replay Katawa Shoujo now that the full version is finally released, yay!
My mother came home from shopping one day and told me there were two eight year old girls buying bras.
...I have lost all hope in humanity.
Hey, maybe they had a congenital growth condition and were actually in their 20s. Maybe they just wanted to know what it was like to wear adult clothes for once, even though they wouldn't technically need a bra.
Well, we did get a large increase in immigration, plus those Chinese guys from the Gold Rush started to look for actual jobs. More people flocked I think because of those big name guys like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford started making money for the US economy. When you compare it to other European countries and their declining economy of the time, it's not that far fetched to say that they had better opportunities by crossing over.
Which is ironic, because the "opportunity" ended up being mostly for Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford.
As for the whole UN thing, it would give off the impression that the United States is above the UN. Whether it's true or not, it's still going to affect foreign relations with allies and opponents alike. I think of the UN more as treehouse club: It's not very useful it a sense, but if you're in it, club members will like you. Or something like that, whatever.
At the very least I think that the U.S. should stop funding it. With 193 member nations why should the guy in debt be footing 22% of the bill? True, if we quit the UN back in the 50s we would have lost a lot of respect with the other nations, but I think at this point in time that anyone who knows what's actually going on would admire the U.S. for ceasing to use the UN as its private little scapegoat.
More details about this? I genuinely want to know how pulling off from the UN is going to help us.
First off, I'd like to note that the UN is a giant ****ing joke. 22% of their funding comes from the United States, and we basically just use them as a scapegoat for when we want to go to war, completely ignoring them if we don't. Allow me to point out the irony in our use of them since the UN was initially formed with the intention of keeping peace. We've been doing this for 50 years, and I see no reason why we should even bother to take part in such a farce anymore. After all, it's not like there are trade penalties for non-members. I'd be more worried about what would happen to other nations if the U.S. pulled out.
p.s. Another reason I like Ron Paul is that he's constantly ranting to the house, trying to get them to actually do their jobs.
Well, from the few that I've seen and read, it looks like he's trying to make the government as limited as possible, which is good, but I don't think a laissez-faire economy would get the country to progress. I mean, we've already tried it before back around the late 1800's to the early 1900's and it didn't work very well for the long run.
I mean, our economy and science clearly progressed during that period, but working conditions were pretty bad. However, I'm pretty sure a lot of that had to do with historical factors as much as socio-political ones. And although we hear horror stories about the terrible pay workers got back then, honestly speaking is it even possible to raise a kid in the modern day on minimum wage? Maybe at 60 hours a week...
I guess I must also research a bit more about the 19th century workers, since I'm not quite sure what to think about it yet. I know that employers would fire their workers at the drop of a hat, but to me that's indicative of a workforce where labor is cheap, which would mean that for whatever reason an unemployed woman with skills in weaving, for instance, wouldn't be able to weave on her own and sell her work as an individual. Similarly, a machinist wouldn't be able to open up his own shop. Does anybody know why that would have been?
edit: As an afterthought, could it have been due to a high immigration rate? Lots of cheap unskilled labor readily available? If so it's a problem we still face what with overpopulation and whatnot. However a lot of that unskilled labor brings its own capital along with it now, instead of individuals stepping off Ellis island with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. And with the advent of the Internet, just about anyone can start their own business, so I don't see anyone being stuck in 90 hour weeks again no matter how de-regulated our businesses become.
Well... when so many people are commenting on his so-called libertarianism I have to assume that's why some people rally to his cause. What exactly do you like about his policies? I've seen virtually nothing worth mentioning.
-Non-interventionism(Not isolationism, despite the critics)
-While he technically "Doesn't support separation of church and state", if you look up his beliefs they basically amount to the same thing.
-He supports the only economic policy that is viable in the long run for our government. Namely, cutting services that our government currently provides us. Obviously everybody will be up in arms about that
-He generally doesn't let his religious beliefs define his policy, because he believes most of that stuff should be on a state level. That's kind of implicitly allowing all of it, because people could just travel to states where they can do whatever they want to do.
-Staunch defender of freedom, one of the few house members that actually had the balls to vote against the patriot act.
-He's never really flip-flopped on an issue. This is much more than any other candidate can say.
-Corporate deregulation. **** the haterz!
For every true word spoken of Ron Paul two lies are spoken of him. I support Ron Paul, because everything I've actually seen/heard him say have been acceptable to me. Not to mention, voting for anyone other than him is voting for party politics.
Maybe now is a good time to take Physical Education more seriously - While it's still free.
I find the tendency for formal exercise interesting. Why can't we all just play tag and throw rocks around, climb trees and such? It's how children stay fit.
Indeed. Recently bought Evangelion and watched it through again. The shot direction in every episode is amazing; something is always being revealed without it being boring to watch.
0
I have a pair of $200(Beyer DT-150) headphones and a pair of $100(Alessandro MS-1) headphones, and I keep them at home. When I go out, I bring my IEMs. Passive sound canceling and decent sound quality without amplification for the win?
I was kind enough to include the above paragraph since you appear to be interested in pointless pissing contests.
0
Every time I see someone wearing beats I think they're ****ing idiots.
0
0
Plug, plug. Plug, plug.
(not a one word post)
0
I find this statement offensive. I consider classical and tribal drum much closer to what one would consider "real music".
0
Hey, maybe they had a congenital growth condition and were actually in their 20s. Maybe they just wanted to know what it was like to wear adult clothes for once, even though they wouldn't technically need a bra.
0
Which is ironic, because the "opportunity" ended up being mostly for Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford.
At the very least I think that the U.S. should stop funding it. With 193 member nations why should the guy in debt be footing 22% of the bill? True, if we quit the UN back in the 50s we would have lost a lot of respect with the other nations, but I think at this point in time that anyone who knows what's actually going on would admire the U.S. for ceasing to use the UN as its private little scapegoat.
0
First off, I'd like to note that the UN is a giant ****ing joke. 22% of their funding comes from the United States, and we basically just use them as a scapegoat for when we want to go to war, completely ignoring them if we don't. Allow me to point out the irony in our use of them since the UN was initially formed with the intention of keeping peace. We've been doing this for 50 years, and I see no reason why we should even bother to take part in such a farce anymore. After all, it's not like there are trade penalties for non-members. I'd be more worried about what would happen to other nations if the U.S. pulled out.
p.s. Another reason I like Ron Paul is that he's constantly ranting to the house, trying to get them to actually do their jobs.
I mean, our economy and science clearly progressed during that period, but working conditions were pretty bad. However, I'm pretty sure a lot of that had to do with historical factors as much as socio-political ones. And although we hear horror stories about the terrible pay workers got back then, honestly speaking is it even possible to raise a kid in the modern day on minimum wage? Maybe at 60 hours a week...
I guess I must also research a bit more about the 19th century workers, since I'm not quite sure what to think about it yet. I know that employers would fire their workers at the drop of a hat, but to me that's indicative of a workforce where labor is cheap, which would mean that for whatever reason an unemployed woman with skills in weaving, for instance, wouldn't be able to weave on her own and sell her work as an individual. Similarly, a machinist wouldn't be able to open up his own shop. Does anybody know why that would have been?
edit: As an afterthought, could it have been due to a high immigration rate? Lots of cheap unskilled labor readily available? If so it's a problem we still face what with overpopulation and whatnot. However a lot of that unskilled labor brings its own capital along with it now, instead of individuals stepping off Ellis island with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. And with the advent of the Internet, just about anyone can start their own business, so I don't see anyone being stuck in 90 hour weeks again no matter how de-regulated our businesses become.
0
-Non-interventionism(Not isolationism, despite the critics)
-While he technically "Doesn't support separation of church and state", if you look up his beliefs they basically amount to the same thing.
-He supports the only economic policy that is viable in the long run for our government. Namely, cutting services that our government currently provides us. Obviously everybody will be up in arms about that
-He generally doesn't let his religious beliefs define his policy, because he believes most of that stuff should be on a state level. That's kind of implicitly allowing all of it, because people could just travel to states where they can do whatever they want to do.
-Staunch defender of freedom, one of the few house members that actually had the balls to vote against the patriot act.
-He's never really flip-flopped on an issue. This is much more than any other candidate can say.
-Corporate deregulation. **** the haterz!
0
Why are you so stuck on a word? I don't care what he is, because I agree with his policies.
0
0
0
I find the tendency for formal exercise interesting. Why can't we all just play tag and throw rocks around, climb trees and such? It's how children stay fit.
0
Indeed. Recently bought Evangelion and watched it through again. The shot direction in every episode is amazing; something is always being revealed without it being boring to watch.
0