'Cards Against Humanity' Gives Out $1000 Checks (nbcchicago.com)
An anonymous reader writes: In November "Cards Against Humanity" announced "a complicated holiday promotion" where people paid $15 for six surprises in December. (For the first surprise in the Cards Against Humanity Saves America promotion, "we purchased a plot of vacant land on the border and retained a law firm specializing in eminent domain to make it as time-consuming and expensive as possible for Trump to build his wall.") The second surprise was the launch of a new podcast filled with positive news, and for the third surprise, they're redistributing the money people paid to join the event. "Most of our subscribers (about 140,000 people) got nothing today — they could have it worse. The next 10,000 subscribers received a full $15 refund of their Cards Against Humanity Saves America purchase. Finally, the poorest 100 people received a check for $1,000, paid for by everyone else."
A new web page shares stories from the grateful participants, and explains the site's careful methodology for determining who needed the $1,000 checks the most. ("We excluded all Canadians. They already have universal healthcare. They'll be fine.") It argues that wealth inequality is the biggest issue in the world, but "Our lawyers advised against our first choice — a campaign to eat all the rich people and live in their houses — so we settled for something more achievable."
A new web page shares stories from the grateful participants, and explains the site's careful methodology for determining who needed the $1,000 checks the most. ("We excluded all Canadians. They already have universal healthcare. They'll be fine.") It argues that wealth inequality is the biggest issue in the world, but "Our lawyers advised against our first choice — a campaign to eat all the rich people and live in their houses — so we settled for something more achievable."
to send them 15 bucks, so i missed out on the thousand. gee, thanks, but the 'poorest' didn't get the check.
That anyone who gave $15 to such a group was, almost by definition, not 'poor'.
This really looks like a big pile of 'how can we virtue signal the strongest', using other peoples money just to make it worse.
I must actually listen to their 'positive news' podcast, to get a better handle on what they consider positive - I am guessing its just more self-ego-stroking from their self-selected echo chambers, but hey, I could be wrong.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This SJW bullshit is like a cancer, making all of my favorite sites political.
Why is this story here? News for nerds? Nope. Stuff that matters? Nope.
BTW, Max Temkin, co-creator of Cards Against Humanity is facing multiple allegations of rape. He uses his wealth to threaten to sue his victims.
That comment about Canada, is actually what concerns me most about liberal politics.
They are poor people all over the world who are suffering. Some may not have the resources to manage the bureaucracy of a government healthcare system. This indicates if they have services available they will be fine, which is far from the truth. And sounds like we are trying to dump all the worlds problems on policy changes vs caring about other people.
Rules and policies are more or less are designed to take the poor people out of our view vs doing anything to help them.
Now we need good safety nets and protection policy to help keep people out of poverty but we need people to be engaged to the problems that will still exist.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I'm Israeli and I'm not sure if they do. We keep relying on palestinians to work inside our borders, and we are also racist to our arab citizens in a way that makes them identify with palestine more than they do with us.
Maybe the wall has some benefit, but you can't just use it and magically forget about the people on the other side.
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
This is the best way to thwart a government. Non-violent, meaningful action works very well against tyrannical governments. History has two big prominent examples: Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Any actions that we can take to stop the Tump Bully Machine are good ones.
How is this any more communist then wealthy republicans donating to their causes?
Actually the republicans donate more money then democrats do, often to help the poor and charities.
It’s their money they can use it to buy a solid gold toilet or they can buy land to try to stop the government from spending money on a symbol to say we don’t like brown people.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I'm not sure they've really thought this through.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
they're serving as an example of what should be done on a broader scale
Really? Get rich through invention, creativity and good marketing, then use other people's money to make grand gestures that benefit almost nobody?
They come across as entrepreneurs turned pretentious pricks.
This is what happens when you try to play politics instead of minding your own fucking business.
I toss you into the toilet.
In a democracy, politics is every fucking citizen's fucking business. Not minding it leads to Trump and similar catastrophes, controlled by those that do mind....
Stephan
In a "he said, she said" situation, how come "I feel like I was assaulted" is more valid than "I feel like I didn't assault you"?
They spend X amount of money on an eminent domain lawyer, the government spends 100 times that amount winning the lawsuit over a few years. There. Cost the taxpayers tons of money to prove no point.
Um, that's idiotic. I am totally against building a wall, but the Berlin wall was extremely effective. But Germany is tiny compared to what Trump is proposing.
A pure democracy will never work as there will always be way too many idiots wanting to tinker with the engine of civilization. They have no idea what a intake valve or piston is for, and they have protests about the unfair treatment of the bacteria trapped in the air filter.
Let me rephrase for people who prefer non-constructively narrow readings: In a republic ("if you can keep it", with apologies to Ben Franklin), politics is every fucking citizen's fucking business. Not minding it leads to Trump and similar catastrophes, controlled by those that do mind....
Stephan
You can't bitch about the government not having enough money to pay for healthcare, and then in the same breath proudly claim you're doing things to cost the government more money.
FAQ: I’m poor and I’m mad that I didn’t get any money.
"Our bad. We had to guess how much money you had with limited data. The US government actually knows how much money you have and has trillions of dollars to redistribute. Why don’t you get mad at the US government?"
Liberals would rather have massive Latino immigration rather than leveling the playing field with African and Asian immigration, who are mostly following the legal path.
Have you been looking to Europe lately, where they have exactly that?
Do you REALLY think that's better?
Yes I have looked at Europe and it's not like that at all. Hundreds of thousands of "refugees" are coming in each year and public services are struggling to bear the weight, even in socialist paradises like Sweden where firefighters and ambulances need police escorts to even enter some neighborhoods.
A while back I heard about RollingJubilee.org. They purchase debt on the secondary market (did you know there is a secondary market for individual debt? I didn't know that before hearing of this group) for a small fraction of its face value and then forgive it. This includes lots of student loan and medical debt in particular.
It so happens that this ends up being about as non-biased in its selection of debt as you can be, as well - the debts are bundled (like mortgages) which has the result of the group never knowing whose debt they are purchasing when they purchase it (until after they have it). Have you ever had a collections agency call you about an overdue debt? At that point your debt has already been sold at least once on a secondary market. This group comes in after that point to buy the debts that the first collections agencies have given up on. These debts are still valid when they buy them; they are legally entitled to collect on their full value if they want but instead they contact the debtors and forgive them.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
"Walls" actually work pretty well against illegal immigration, whether it's an actual wall, a moat, patrolling guards, coast guard, or something else. They just don't work 100%. This is the same kind of argument people use against improving highways because "the traffic jam will just move a couple of kilometers down the road". By that logic, you could just open up the border and let everyone in.
"Walls don't work" is a meaningless slogan. Instead assess how big an issue Latino immigration actually is, and what impact Trump's wall will actually make compared to what's currently on the border. Not a lot, probably.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Their goal was to prevent the wall being built, saving billions of dollars. If they can delay long enough Trump might run out of time or political capital to do it.
Or did you think Mexico was paying for it?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It's hard not to notice how angry conservatives get when people who don't agree with them exercise their First Amendment rights.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
So what is the plan, cede the land to Mexico? Because if you build the wall close to the border and make it unpassable, it's gonna be pretty difficult to stop Mexicans on the other side simply using it as their own.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The Wall in Israel dramatically reduced the number of murdered Israeli citizens by forcing the bombers and assassins through security checkpoints, where most are either caught or turn back.
Of all the things you can complain about, having a wall that physically separates the Israelis from a group of people whom 60% want to genocide them is not one of them.
Gift them the wall, require they pay for ongoing maintenance. That'll teach em.
Here you go. A few interesting takeaways:
1. Conservative households tend to make about 6% less than Liberal households, yet give 30% more to charity.
2. There are more "big donors" (those who give over $1000) among Conservatives than Liberals
3. In the 2012 Presidential election, the top 15 charitable States all voted for the GOP; the bottom 15 overwhelmingly (13 of 15) voted for the Democrats.
4. Religious people (usually more on the Conservative side of things) tend to overwhelmingly give to charities as compared to non-religious
5. Married people (who tend to be more conservative on average) give much more than unmarried people
6. The US by far and away is the most charitable nation on Earth
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The US government spends more per capita on healthcare than almost any other nation. Yes, the US government, excluding the private sector.
The problem with the US healthcare system isn't excessive stinginess by the government, it is excessive costs and excessive prices. And the ACA did nothing to address excessive costs and prices (because drug companies, lawyers, and doctors tend to be big donors), instead it simply tried to force Americans to pay those excessive prices in perpetuity, which ensures that this will never get fixed.
And by "healthcare", you mean the yachts and estates of wealthy doctors, insurance company executives, and pharmaceutical companies.
Have you played Cards Against Humanity? Have you ever thought that maybe there's some humor woven in to their actions?
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Walls work temporarily, but eventually they fail. Look at all the walls of history, no ancient wall marks a modern border.
Why weren't you saying the same thing when Obama signed his 800 mile border wall extension in 2013 ?
It's just trump is evil ?
Probably because in reality, what Obama was doing was different, namely a measured and considered response that reflected a rational desire to mitigate harm that was based on acutal problems, and not the blatant hyperbole that Trump resorted to, which is really Trump's own fault because of his personal lack of temperance and desire to concoct imagined demons to fight. In fact, he himself rejected the fencing of the Bush and Obama days in preference to his own concrete edifice. Among other castigations.
You see, some of us haven't forgotten that Trump denounced Democrats for "an open door policy" that was entirely his concoction while falsely claiming phony successes of his own.
But hey, great that you're admitting that Trump lied. One lie down, dozens to go!
Only a conservative could be so reality-averse they are able to ignore the almost daily public temper tantrums thrown by the current US President while accusing liberals of being immature.
Thanks for the chuckle.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
By that logic we shouldn't protest anything the government does because if it doesn't work out just wastes money. Money is clearly the most important thing here, a few million in litigation tops out of the billions being pissed away on this thing.
Or maybe we could go really nuts and claim it's a subsidy to Mexico. A 30ft high wall is a massive stimulus program for 31ft ladder manufacturers south of the border.
Also, well done calling my post retarded. Really adds credibility to your argument-by-Trump "it will definitely happen, and it will be easy" narrative.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I see that somehow donations to religious institutions count for 39% of those donations. sounds a lot like the buyout of indulgentia in the late middle ages.
Does that 30% more to "charity" include tithes and other donations to their church? If so, then they are buying their places in heaven and donating to their local social club. A bit self serving in that type of charity.
I don't think you have ever tried a private system. As a sufferer of a disease that requires the occasional MRI I can get one in about one weeks time. My fellow suffering friends in Britain who have the NHS system covering them have to wait 4 months for an MRI. There is proof that government run healthcare stinks.
Conservatives often get angry and vituperative when decent Americans resist them, no matter how peacefully it is done.
Why does the idea that people exercised their constitutional right to buy and own property, then chose to use it as they are legally allowed to fill you with rage?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
And how many of these "charities" are pushing a religious agenda? Giving to groups like Bibles for Missions may count to some as giving to charity, but not to me.
Since supporting your religion of choice is "charitable giving" in the US, nothing you wrote is surprising. Subtract "charitable giving" to religious causes and -- surprise! -- secular and non-secular giving rates are about the same. Now...where do the majority of religious people live, as a percent of a state's total population? In which states do the majority of non-religious people live, as a percentage of total population? Argument skewing with statistics. Fun for everyone!
Slashdot started up that way. Where were you?
Bruce Perens.
It's easy to say that when churches are considered "charities" and the republicans actively court every church goer they can find.
This distortion is clearly evident from your own article, but ignored in your post. 40% of the way down the page is the breakdown, "Religion and Charitable Giving". The church-goers group gives slightly more than the non church goers to secular causes, but they dwarf everything else on the chart with their donations to the church.
Don't get all holier than though about charity when 70% of your "charitable" contributions went to a church.
Just like Obama's 'Muslim Ban', which was a specific and limited response to a known and quantifiable threat from one specific country, as compared to Trump's 'Muslim Ban' which was a broad ban on multiple countries without any specific information as to any threats from any of them.
The awesome thing about the wall is that it managed to stop suicide attacks before it was completed. It's still not quite complete, amusingly. It's almost as though Palestinians decided to stop the suicide bombings, and the Israelis just wanted more land....
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
It's easy to say that when churches are considered "charities" and the republicans actively court every church goer they can find.
This distortion is clearly evident from your own article, but ignored in your post. 40% of the way down the page is the breakdown, "Religion and Charitable Giving". The church-goers group gives slightly more than the non church goers to secular causes, but they dwarf everything else on the chart with their donations to the church.
Don't get all holier than though about charity when 70% of your "charitable" contributions went to a church.
So, by your own review, the Church-goers still 'win'. And to accept your 'point', you would have to imagine that Church contributions go only to fund church operations. They don't. Church raised funds also go to charity operations both directly (food banks, for example) and indirectly (providing a meeting space- and building heating- for local groups like boys and girl scouts, AA, etc.)
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.