The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Last Week Tonight takes a 2 month break, and still somehow ends up coming out one day too early...
+41
Doctor DetroitNot a doctorTree townRegistered Userregular
To be fair, John did pretty much say (while talking about the big events they missed), “We’re taping this on Saturday, who knows what’s going to happen by the time you watch this!”
Well an upside to them not having recorded on Sunday. Is that they can no devote a whole episode to the play by play from Biden dropping out and all the pathetic republican flailing and fuckery that is following it. My past self would think my future self was lying if I were to go back in time and tell myself that we'd have a major party candidate whine on his social media site about how it's unfair that the presumptive nominee for the other party dropped out and that he should get a refund on all the money spent to specifically campaign against that former candidate. Sad thing is wouldn't have to go that far back because as pathetic as I thought Trump was, never thought he'd be that pathetic.
Well an upside to them not having recorded on Sunday. Is that they can no devote a whole episode to the play by play from Biden dropping out and all the pathetic republican flailing and fuckery that is following it. My past self would think my future self was lying if I were to go back in time and tell myself that we'd have a major party candidate whine on his social media site about how it's unfair that the presumptive nominee for the other party dropped out and that he should get a refund on all the money spent to specifically campaign against that former candidate. Sad thing is wouldn't have to go that far back because as pathetic as I thought Trump was, never thought he'd be that pathetic.
I dunno, every time he appears in public and opens his mouth, it’s pretty clear he has BLPPB and hopefully will get a diagnosis from a doctor soon.
Well an upside to them not having recorded on Sunday. Is that they can no devote a whole episode to the play by play from Biden dropping out and all the pathetic republican flailing and fuckery that is following it. My past self would think my future self was lying if I were to go back in time and tell myself that we'd have a major party candidate whine on his social media site about how it's unfair that the presumptive nominee for the other party dropped out and that he should get a refund on all the money spent to specifically campaign against that former candidate. Sad thing is wouldn't have to go that far back because as pathetic as I thought Trump was, never thought he'd be that pathetic.
I dunno, every time he appears in public and opens his mouth, it’s pretty clear he has BLPPB and hopefully will get a diagnosis from a doctor soon.
Well an upside to them not having recorded on Sunday. Is that they can no devote a whole episode to the play by play from Biden dropping out and all the pathetic republican flailing and fuckery that is following it. My past self would think my future self was lying if I were to go back in time and tell myself that we'd have a major party candidate whine on his social media site about how it's unfair that the presumptive nominee for the other party dropped out and that he should get a refund on all the money spent to specifically campaign against that former candidate. Sad thing is wouldn't have to go that far back because as pathetic as I thought Trump was, never thought he'd be that pathetic.
I dunno, every time he appears in public and opens his mouth, it’s pretty clear he has BLPPB and hopefully will get a diagnosis from a doctor soon.
Yeah, but that's not covered by any American insurance companies.
It's also not covered by any provinces, like most form of mental health. Hopefully, now that they got dental, the NDP will push for a federal mental health plan.
My only complaint is that they're sticking with "Indecision 20XX"
It's been "Only Decision 20XX" for at least three cycles now.
I always figured it was pointing out how wishy-washy the American electorate seems to be when it comes to what they want from their elected officials. I do not think it was intended as an endorsement or non-endorsement of either candidate.
+1
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
A lot of TDS's best stuff is lampooning not just politics but the way "legit" news media covers it. They have always poked at how the political media want a horserace for ratings, and how utterly compromised they are. Arguably they want Trump back because they had a massive upswing in business during his term (I genuinely think that people were just sick of it by the end and there's no way they're getting that business back, a bit like how the video game industry experienced a massive dropoff once quarantines and lockdowns were lifted, but tell that to growth-obsessed shareholders), and most of them have marching orders from the top because their majority owner is some scumbag billionaire who flat-out agrees with Trump.
The media fosters indecision as best they can, because if they're too obviously in the tank for one of the worst human beings alive people will just start ignoring them outright, but if they actually committed themselves to being accurate the Dems would probably win 90% of races by 31 lengths.
My only complaint is that they're sticking with "Indecision 20XX"
It's been "Only Decision 20XX" for at least three cycles now.
I always figured it was pointing out how wishy-washy the American electorate seems to be when it comes to what they want from their elected officials. I do not think it was intended as an endorsement or non-endorsement of either candidate.
It was a poke at NBC/MSNBC and Decision 2004 after 2000 made them so much money
Watched it Sunday, forget the exact figure, but the wildest part was that something like $3-4 out the $4-5/kid meal budget goes to labor/overhead, and thus a $1/kid increase would double the budget for the actual food. I would have guessed it broke the other way.
Watched it Sunday, forget the exact figure, but the wildest part was that something like $3-4 out the $4-5/kid meal budget goes to labor/overhead, and thus a $1/kid increase would double the budget for the actual food. I would have guessed it broke the other way.
Basic food service cost division is 1/3 food, 1/3 labor, and 1/3 overhead. Adding a dollar per individual increase would still probably split it evenly 3 ways, as I'm sure it's not only the food that gets squeezed with the low allotment.
Not surprised at all that the lion's share of the money went towards labor and overhead. When you think about it school lunches have a great lineup for reaping the benefits of economy of scale and likely the school system is scoring a pretty good deal with suppliers because in theory the school system isn't going to go out of business anytime soon. That said, that is likely too low a cost for food they should increase it, while bringing back free lunches for all kids.
It also shows what assholes many employers are, when they screech about how having to pay living wages would mean that no one could afford food. I mean, I'd wager that the schools are probably paying better wages to their staff than most of the restaurant and cartering industry, even if we concede that for school lunches, you don't have to rent a venue since the school will have that anyways (though I'd argue that school cafeteria's don't have the benefit of being open for most of the day serving customers).
Not surprised at all that the lion's share of the money went towards labor and overhead. When you think about it school lunches have a great lineup for reaping the benefits of economy of scale and likely the school system is scoring a pretty good deal with suppliers because in theory the school system isn't going to go out of business anytime soon. That said, that is likely too low a cost for food they should increase it, while bringing back free lunches for all kids.
It also shows what assholes many employers are, when they screech about how having to pay living wages would mean that no one could afford food. I mean, I'd wager that the schools are probably paying better wages to their staff than most of the restaurant and cartering industry, even if we concede that for school lunches, you don't have to rent a venue since the school will have that anyways (though I'd argue that school cafeteria's don't have the benefit of being open for most of the day serving customers).
Schools here in WA serve both breakfast and lunch, covering half the day. My local state rep (who is also on the school board) has been a major pusher for universal free lunches/breakfasts in the state. Two other associated problems is that recesses have shrunk (along with lunch times), causing kids to also lose time to eat. In our district, in elementary school, they get a 20 minute recess, then at lunchtime a 20 minute recess and a 20 minute lunch. My younger kid especially struggled to get through her lunch in that period of time, and even my older kid sometimes had to trade social time for eating time. In middle school this year, (fifth grade) he loses the extra recess. The other issue is that the kids get no snacks during the day, which can be a LONG time between meals depending on what time their meal break is. I'm firmly a proponent of free meals for all kids K-12 (really, for all ages, but that's a different topic), Breakfast, lunch as well as 1-2 snacks (even if it's just crackers and juice), and more recess (30 minutes per at least). If this comes at the cost of reduced performance on standardized testing, so be it.
Not surprised at all that the lion's share of the money went towards labor and overhead. When you think about it school lunches have a great lineup for reaping the benefits of economy of scale and likely the school system is scoring a pretty good deal with suppliers because in theory the school system isn't going to go out of business anytime soon. That said, that is likely too low a cost for food they should increase it, while bringing back free lunches for all kids.
It also shows what assholes many employers are, when they screech about how having to pay living wages would mean that no one could afford food. I mean, I'd wager that the schools are probably paying better wages to their staff than most of the restaurant and cartering industry, even if we concede that for school lunches, you don't have to rent a venue since the school will have that anyways (though I'd argue that school cafeteria's don't have the benefit of being open for most of the day serving customers).
Yeah that all sounds right to me... when I worked fast food back in the day I think an $0.80 hamburger had something of $0.03 in materials and negligible margin. The breaks were staggered in part to ensure that a given hour didn't run at a loss during the slow times. A cafeteria having limited hours makes it easier to run at a profit.
0
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
John even points out himself whenever he brings up a topic, his audience's normal reaction is now "oh god, what's wrong with <topic> and why is John bringing it up?!"
+11
HerrCronIt that wickedly supports taxationRegistered Userregular
I knew about some of this from people posting on these forums, but wow do we need a better social safety net.
While I appreciate his work, and love his comedy, pretty much every LWT episode has my brain yelling "How the fuck is this allowed to happen?".
Doubley so when it's "How the fuck is this allowed to continue to happen?".
I know when he started, some people questioned why it was only once a week, and not 4-5 times like most of the other semi-similar shows.
But honestly? I don't think I could deal with it more than once a week, with significant hiatuses.
Well, the original title for the show was
Discussing systemic issues in the cadence of a joke with Saddy Longlegs.
So once a week is probably for the best.
I do pity the researchers, writing staff, and John himself as they don't get a break from it.
HerrCron on
Now Playing:
Celeste [Switch] - She'll be wrestling with inner demons when she comes...
Super Mario Wonder - Wowie Zowie!
I knew about some of this from people posting on these forums, but wow do we need a better social safety net.
While I appreciate his work, and love his comedy, pretty much every LWT episode has my brain yelling "How the fuck is this allowed to happen?".
Doubley so when it's "How the fuck is this allowed to continue to happen?".
I know when he started, some people questioned why it was only once a week, and not 4-5 times like most of the other semi-similar shows.
But honestly? I don't think I could deal with it more than once a week, with significant hiatuses.
Well, the original title for the show was
Discussing systemic issues in the cadence of a joke with Saddy Longlegs.
So once a week is probably for the best.
I do pity the researchers, writing staff, and John himself as they don't get a break from it.
I'd imagine it's why they throw in crazy funny stunts many times. Balance out the sad with "hey let's rig a bird election in New Zealand" or "we should buy Russell Crowes jockstrap and send it to one of the last blockbusters".
He just found a technical loophole that any engineer would be proud of.
"Let's take a look at the scores! The girls are at the square root of Pi, while the boys are still at a crudely drawn picture of a duck. Clearly, it's anybody's game!"
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
We can fully expect that the social safety net will not be getting improved enough until the GOP stops fighting it tooth and nail, which is going to conveniently be around the time that the majority of elderly Boomers desperately in need of help suddenly love socialism... for themselves. And they will absolutely try to fuck over anybody younger while funneling all those tax dollars their own way, while also proclaiming that it's too teach us a lesson about pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps.
Yeah, we really need to get a bunch of systems set to automatically index with inflation. It would ensure those programs continue to work without needing the government to constantly pass things just to bring the benefits in line with being useful and not make it so that being on the programs essentially end up being super punitive. Of course Republicans are going to fight it tooth and nail because cruelty is the point for them and they've built a whole mythos about the government not being able to solve anything.
On top of using a list of jobs that is almost half a century out of date, they also are using guidelines that are just a much out of date. It's crazy to see the math that shows the original 2K in assets would be something like 10K, though that still seems low to me.
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Krugman, among others, has described the US budget as a pension/insurance plan with an armed forces attached, and that's before peak Boomer retirement. I'm going to be disappointed, but not surprised, if the eventual solution will be gutting future benefits for the sub-60 crowd (but they'll up the IRA contribution limit or something, wooooo). And given the smoking hole in the ground that is a lot of people's retirement savings, I wouldn't be shocked if they decide to give Social Security payments a bump and maybe even do something stupid like the UK's triple-lock.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Krugman, among others, has described the US budget as a pension/insurance plan with an armed forces attached, and that's before peak Boomer retirement. I'm going to be disappointed, but not surprised, if the eventual solution will be gutting future benefits for the sub-60 crowd (but they'll up the IRA contribution limit or something, wooooo). And given the smoking hole in the ground that is a lot of people's retirement savings, I wouldn't be shocked if they decide to give Social Security payments a bump and maybe even do something stupid like the UK's triple-lock.
And that'll be before the most obvious fucking assist is even attempted.
And that's the cap on salaries over a certain amount. I wanna say it's $127k? Almost certain it is in the low six figures.
Basically, everyone pays a percentage of each dollar into SocSec. Except it only applies to each dollar below a certain number. Once you've paid taxes on that amount, every additional dollar is exempt.
It's a stupid way of doing it, and should have been the first thing removed (or even just raised, I don't think it's indexed, so as wages rise, more people are earning above it) when it looked like there was potential trouble.
$168k, and it moves with the wage index, so it's not completely stupid; but the cap should be removed regardless.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Posts
And TDS is apparently off this week.
I dunno, every time he appears in public and opens his mouth, it’s pretty clear he has BLPPB and hopefully will get a diagnosis from a doctor soon.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Yeah, but that's not covered by any American insurance companies.
It's also not covered by any provinces, like most form of mental health. Hopefully, now that they got dental, the NDP will push for a federal mental health plan.
Also his reaction to Dick Cheney's endorsement of Kamala.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
It's been "Only Decision 20XX" for at least three cycles now.
Branding is stronk
Look, he's old and stuck in his ways. He should retire, but we can't ask him to change
He should step down to make room for Desi Lydic to take over full time hosting.
An argument could be made for Jordan Klepper.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
I always figured it was pointing out how wishy-washy the American electorate seems to be when it comes to what they want from their elected officials. I do not think it was intended as an endorsement or non-endorsement of either candidate.
The media fosters indecision as best they can, because if they're too obviously in the tank for one of the worst human beings alive people will just start ignoring them outright, but if they actually committed themselves to being accurate the Dems would probably win 90% of races by 31 lengths.
It was a poke at NBC/MSNBC and Decision 2004 after 2000 made them so much money
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6349371
Watched it Sunday, forget the exact figure, but the wildest part was that something like $3-4 out the $4-5/kid meal budget goes to labor/overhead, and thus a $1/kid increase would double the budget for the actual food. I would have guessed it broke the other way.
Basic food service cost division is 1/3 food, 1/3 labor, and 1/3 overhead. Adding a dollar per individual increase would still probably split it evenly 3 ways, as I'm sure it's not only the food that gets squeezed with the low allotment.
It also shows what assholes many employers are, when they screech about how having to pay living wages would mean that no one could afford food. I mean, I'd wager that the schools are probably paying better wages to their staff than most of the restaurant and cartering industry, even if we concede that for school lunches, you don't have to rent a venue since the school will have that anyways (though I'd argue that school cafeteria's don't have the benefit of being open for most of the day serving customers).
Schools here in WA serve both breakfast and lunch, covering half the day. My local state rep (who is also on the school board) has been a major pusher for universal free lunches/breakfasts in the state. Two other associated problems is that recesses have shrunk (along with lunch times), causing kids to also lose time to eat. In our district, in elementary school, they get a 20 minute recess, then at lunchtime a 20 minute recess and a 20 minute lunch. My younger kid especially struggled to get through her lunch in that period of time, and even my older kid sometimes had to trade social time for eating time. In middle school this year, (fifth grade) he loses the extra recess. The other issue is that the kids get no snacks during the day, which can be a LONG time between meals depending on what time their meal break is. I'm firmly a proponent of free meals for all kids K-12 (really, for all ages, but that's a different topic), Breakfast, lunch as well as 1-2 snacks (even if it's just crackers and juice), and more recess (30 minutes per at least). If this comes at the cost of reduced performance on standardized testing, so be it.
Yeah that all sounds right to me... when I worked fast food back in the day I think an $0.80 hamburger had something of $0.03 in materials and negligible margin. The breaks were staggered in part to ensure that a given hour didn't run at a loss during the slow times. A cafeteria having limited hours makes it easier to run at a profit.
I knew about some of this from people posting on these forums, but wow do we need a better social safety net.
Well, the original title for the show was
Discussing systemic issues in the cadence of a joke with Saddy Longlegs.
So once a week is probably for the best.
I do pity the researchers, writing staff, and John himself as they don't get a break from it.
Celeste [Switch] - She'll be wrestling with inner demons when she comes...
Super Mario Wonder - Wowie Zowie!
The fact that the job list hasn't been updated since 1977 was insane to me, a person born in 1977.
There's a reason why my mental tagline for LWT is "Comedy that enrages you".
I'd imagine it's why they throw in crazy funny stunts many times. Balance out the sad with "hey let's rig a bird election in New Zealand" or "we should buy Russell Crowes jockstrap and send it to one of the last blockbusters".
I voted fair and square.
He just found a technical loophole that any engineer would be proud of.
On top of using a list of jobs that is almost half a century out of date, they also are using guidelines that are just a much out of date. It's crazy to see the math that shows the original 2K in assets would be something like 10K, though that still seems low to me.
$168k, and it moves with the wage index, so it's not completely stupid; but the cap should be removed regardless.