Kim Jong Un makes another threat at S.K. (and the US)

It's just so fucking hilarious how he throws around really awful shit, then he gets hit by an insult the equivalent of a fucking feather landing in a pool of water and he has the nerve to flip his shit? I'm all for subjectivity but Xerro just takes it from normal misinterpretation to...

wait can't explain the joke, never explain the joke it's not like Clopper is gonna get it through his xerrobrain as to why people give him shit, just laugh, pass popcorn, insert standard laugh track, keep it on

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

And stop being so dump on-able, you autist.

Suck my dick, you retard.


Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

xerrofoot wrote:

Suck my dick, you retard.


Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

'As far as I can tell, "edgy" occurs when middle-brow, middle-aged profiteers are looking to suck the energy, not to mention spending money, out of the quote-unquote "youth culture," so they come up with this fake concept of seeming to be dangerous when every move they make is the result of market research and a corporate master plan.'

Switch around a few words and you both fit the bill, really.

xerrofoot wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

And stop being so dump on-able, you autist.

Suck my dick, you retard.


Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

This is you saying this. You.

I mean, I'm all for rape jokes because, hey, they're funny. But you can't go around threatening to rape people, and then get offended when someone calls you autistic, and then expect ANYONE to take you seriously.

But you don't understand why this is the case, due to your crippling autism.

Cloppy are you making up fantasies that people are empathetic to you and respect your boundaries, again?

Disco Stu wrote:

It's just so fucking hilarious how he throws around really awful shit, then he gets hit by an insult the equivalent of a fucking feather landing in a pool of water and he has the nerve to flip his shit?

The Nork's new fearless leader does seem a bit over-sensitive, doesn't he?

Quote :

I'm all for subjectivity but Xerro just takes it from normal misinterpretation to...

So... Not back to the topic after all. It came so close, too!

Hey come on now this is going a bit far, long time lurker so I know this Xerrofoot guy has said some fucking stupid (in some cases unforgivable) stuff but this is just starting to turn into bullying. Not trying to be a white knight by any stretch of the imagination but still.

Wow what an insightful thought provoking response

John Marston wrote:

Wow what an insightful thought provoking response

Your sarcasm falls a bit flat, seeing as I clearly wasn't trying to be either.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

I work forty hours a week and pay taxes so that people on disability who can't work can get benefits and don't have to starve to death in the street. Say thank you.

Why do we argue? You're clearly a conservative, judging by this sentence.

No, a true conservative would complain that hir taxes are being used to help herniated bronies.

xerrofoot wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

And stop being so dump on-able, you autist.

Suck my dick, you retard.

Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

I get what you're trying to do but it's not helping you make your point. You make your point by sticking with it regardless of how other people behave.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

I mean, I'm all for rape jokes because, hey, they're funny.

Let's agree to disagree on this, but the point is moot anyway, because he doesn't make rape jokes. I've seen people say that before as well, and it bothered me then, too. "Nine in ten people enjoy gang rape" is a rape joke. "I'll make you watch while I rape your best friend" is not. It may not hold much credibility as a threat, but a joke it ain't.

John Marston wrote:

Hey come on now this is going a bit far, long time lurker so I know this Xerrofoot guy has said some fucking stupid (in some cases unforgivable) stuff but this is just starting to turn into bullying. Not trying to be a white knight by any stretch of the imagination but still.

The thing is that as long as he's going to be obnoxious, people are going to tell him as much- and someone who tries to be the douchebag kind of cool and casually calls a dictator "Kimmie" and thinks that he still totally belongs in politics is obnoxious. Someone who makes a thread about a weird invention and starts off by labeling the entire target demographic 'losers' is obnoxious. Every single post of his drips with condescending, judgmental douchebag-ness. And as long as he continues that, people will laugh at him.

It's true that he gets shit for stuff other people would get away with, and sometimes it's a little "oh, come on, the cheap shot again?", I agree. I don't know that I'd call it bullying though; nobody is following him home or trying to seek him out- if he doesn't like it he could lurk more or post elsewhere or, y'know, try to be less of a douchebag.

Props to you for un-lurking for something like that.*


*Not sarcasm.

Chris91 wrote:

xerrobrains

...that...that is actually clever.

xerrohoof wrote:

Stop fucking dumping on me, you assholes.

oic wat u did there

xerrohoof wrote:

AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

I thought "being edgy" was your whole schtick, Clopper. But seriously, this is your problem: you can dish it out, but you can't take it. Don't they have that saying in Australia? You can't go around threatening people and then whine when Mikey calls you an autist - well, you can, but people sure as hell can call you on your hypocrisy. FWIW I think cracks about autism are just as disgusting as rape and murder threats.

I don't know if you have autism, or if you're socially awkward, secretly fourteen, or just have your head up your ass. But if your LOL I TROLL U/Internet Tough Guy behaviour is your attempt to fit in here because it works on other forums like 4chan or /b/, I advise you to stop. Here's some more advice - when someone calls you a waste of fucking oxygen, never reply "NUH UH I GIVE TO CHARITY, WHAT DO YOU DO, HUH?!" In fact, never respond to insults by trying to prove that you aren't whatever the insult was. It only invites further mockery.

grmblfjx wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

I work forty hours a week and pay taxes so that people on disability who can't work can get benefits and don't have to starve to death in the street. Say thank you.

Why do we argue? You're clearly a conservative, judging by this sentence.

No, a true conservative would complain that hir taxes are being used to help herniated bronies.

Yeah, really. I have no objection to handing up a third of my wages in tax money to help people who can't or don't work, and I don't care if some people are on the fiddle because I think a few dole cheats here and there is a small price to pay for a decent social welfare safety net. Any of us could be in a car wreck tomorrow and unable to work for the rest of our lives, and I for one don't want to have to take my fucked up legs and beg on the street to stay alive. And any charity work is better than sitting inside wanking to cartoons all day. I'm just playing with Clopper a little bit because responding to "you're a waste of fucking oxygen" with "I WORK FOR CHARITY FUCK YOU" is ludicrous.

Gumball wrote:

Let's agree to disagree on this, but the point is moot anyway, because he doesn't make rape jokes. I've seen people say that before as well, and it bothered me then, too. "Nine in ten people enjoy gang rape" is a rape joke. "I'll make you watch while I rape your best friend" is not. It may not hold much credibility as a threat, but a joke it ain't.

This is entirely true. Xerrobrains (have to throw Chrissy a bone for his first successful witticism) doesn't really make rape jokes as much as he runs around yelling "RAPE RAPE RAPE LOLOLOLOLOLOL RAPE" at the top of his lungs before shitting on the coffee table.

Cyberwulf wrote:

FWIW I think cracks about autism are just as disgusting as rape and murder threats.

You don't see the difference between an overdiagnosed mental illness and violent crime? Seriously.

I mean, sure, joking about autism is mean, but I'm okay with that, because frankly Clopper has done nothing to warrant any niceties. But if you can't tell the difference between mean spirited needling and threats of violence, you are insane.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Any of us could be in a car wreck tomorrow and unable to work for the rest of our lives,

That is a bunch of crap. If the likes of Darryl Stingley and Darren Drozdov can find work, Clopper and others with injuries like him can goddamn well find work. You can work any desk job without your legs (as my dad did for a month while he waited for his broken ankle to heal to the point where he could go back to full duty on the fire department). And feeding rugs into a cutting machine seems to involve small amounts of lifting and movement, so Clopper is better off than either Stingley or Drozdov.

When someone is getting $30,000 a year (theoretically number for example) to be disabled and not work, they are not going to take a job that pays $25,000 a year and lose the $30,000 in government handouts. It's human fucking nature, you can't fight it and you can't deny it. I highly doubt there are a huge number of welfare dependents kicking back with an evil laugh and going "BWAHAHA I AM ABUSING THE SYSTEM FOR MY OWN GAINS." People rationalize it so they don't feel like bums. They say "well, I only need a little bit of help until I find another job," after three fucking years of collecting unemployment benefits.

A small amount of government support isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is always going to waste some money. The bigger the government, and the more handout programs it has, the more money it's going to waste.

Then you end up $17,000,000,000,000 in debt because you wanted to "help" people, and still haven't accomplished a fucking thing.

Socially inept clopping manchild wrote:

Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

Oh my.

And yeah, I'm 99% sure it already has been explained to Clopper that this:

Cyberwulf wrote:

But seriously, this is your problem: you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

is why we all treat him with such derision and ridicule. But his cro-magnon mind appears unable to grasp the concept.

Michael wrote:

When someone is getting $30,000 a year (theoretically number for example) to be disabled and not work, they are not going to take a job that pays $25,000 a year and lose the $30,000 in government handouts. It's human fucking nature, you can't fight it and you can't deny it.

I assessed housing applications for a living up until 5 months ago (and I still sub for the person doing it now), so I have a good working knowledge of how the Social Welfare system works in Ireland, which has a reasonably strong welfare state. I know what each payment is for, whether it's income based or just based on whether or not you're working etc. etc. and I'm struggling to contrive a set of circumstances where a household would be better off not working (or claiming Disability Allowance) instead of having a part-time or full-time job. At least in terms of pure after-tax income anyway. Obviously, if the only job they can get is a 2 hour commute away and there's no bus route because this is fucking Ireland, then it's possible they might be better off after their petrol costs are accounted for or something like that.

Don't get me wrong, I do occassionally run across some that seem to get quite a lot in welfare benefits, and very occassionally, I am tempted to throw up over it. But at the same time, I wouldn't say too many of them are better off financially than I am (since the best way to pad out that Jobseekers or Disability payment is to pile on the kids, and they cost money to maintain). And I'm not exactly overpaid.

Hot Cancer wrote:

Socially inept clopping manchild wrote:

Oooh, I can use disability slurs too. AREN'T I SO FUCKING EDGY

Oh my.

And yeah, I'm 99% sure it already has been explained to Clopper that this:

Cyberwulf wrote:

But seriously, this is your problem: you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

is why we all treat him with such derision and ridicule. But his cro-magnon mind appears unable to grasp the concept.

That insulting against cro-magnon. You had better issue a public apology before that terminally unfunny caveman from the Geico commercials comes back.

Hot Cancer wrote:

Michael wrote:

When someone is getting $30,000 a year (theoretically number for example) to be disabled and not work, they are not going to take a job that pays $25,000 a year and lose the $30,000 in government handouts. It's human fucking nature, you can't fight it and you can't deny it.

I assessed housing applications for a living up until 5 months ago (and I still sub for the person doing it now), so I have a good working knowledge of how the Social Welfare system works in Ireland, which has a reasonably strong welfare state. I know what each payment is for, whether it's income based or just based on whether or not you're working etc. etc. and I'm struggling to contrive a set of circumstances where a household would be better off not working (or claiming Disability Allowance) instead of having a part-time or full-time job. At least in terms of pure after-tax income anyway. Obviously, if the only job they can get is a 2 hour commute away and there's no bus route because this is fucking Ireland, then it's possible they might be better off after their petrol costs are accounted for or something like that.

Don't get me wrong, I do occassionally run across some that seem to get quite a lot in welfare benefits, and very occassionally, I am tempted to throw up over it. But at the same time, I wouldn't say too many of them are better off financially than I am (since the best way to pad out that Jobseekers or Disability payment is to pile on the kids, and they cost money to maintain). And I'm not exactly overpaid.

Such programs are most likely MUCH easier to manage for all of Ireland than it is for all of the US. This is because Ireland has the geographic size and population of a small state. It is impossible for one entity to run such programs for 320 million people and not have it either be horribly run or insanely expensive, due to the manpower needed to keep tabs on EVERYTHING.

Which is exactly why, in America, it should be left to the states. This accomplishes two things. First, it brings the "supervisors" closer to the process, which means better oversight, and less gross waste.

Secondly, it let's 50 different entities come up with 50 different ways of doing things. One would hope that at least one of them would figure out something that works, and other states may pick it up. Furthermore, what specifically works for some states may not work for others, due to resources, demographics, and blah blah I never fucking payed attention in Anthropology.

Side Note: Even if done "right," as in efficiently, there is always a point of diminishing returns where you're no longer helping people for a month so they can get themselves another job or whatever, but you're strongly disincentivizing them getting a job. For instance, that person who could have gotten that job 2 hours away turned it down because he gets all that government money and can afford to wait for something local to open up. If he didn't get all this government money, he'd move to get that job.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

doesn't really make rape jokes as much as he runs around yelling "RAPE RAPE RAPE LOLOLOLOLOLOL RAPE" at the top of his lungs

Yeah, that.

Quote :

A small amount of government support isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is always going to waste some money. The bigger the government, and the more handout programs it has, the more money it's going to waste.

I can't comment on the question of scale, I haven't looked into that- but, see, the difference between conservatives and ebul commies isn't that one side thinks this happens and the other denies it. We all know this happens. We all know that it's impossible to make sure nobody gets a cent more than they totally deserve.
The difference is that the ebul European commies think that price is worth paying.

Quote :

and I'm struggling to contrive a set of circumstances where a household would be better off not working (or claiming Disability Allowance) instead of having a part-time or full-time job.

*raises hand and points at bio-dad*

He made 2x the amount of money when he was on unemployment then he is working as a prison guard. With no health benefits.

grmblfjx wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

doesn't really make rape jokes as much as he runs around yelling "RAPE RAPE RAPE LOLOLOLOLOLOL RAPE" at the top of his lungs

Yeah, that.

Quote :

A small amount of government support isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is always going to waste some money. The bigger the government, and the more handout programs it has, the more money it's going to waste.

I can't comment on the question of scale, I haven't looked into that- but, see, the difference between conservatives and ebul commies isn't that one side thinks this happens and the other denies it. We all know this happens. We all know that it's impossible to make sure nobody gets a cent more than they totally deserve.
The difference is that the ebul European commies think that price is worth paying.

Don't be so hard on yourself. It's not because you're evil, it's because you're stupid.