MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: MuggsyB on August 25, 2023, 04:51:44 PM
-
Seriously?
Who knew we have a "alcohol czar"?
-
Seriously?
Who knew we have a "alcohol czar"?
Obviously not a Marquette alum.
I hate the term "czar" applied to just about anyone who heads one of the huge numbers of government departments of whatever. Its asinine.
Just another example of how out of touch bureaucrats can be. Brewery stocks are gonna crash, right?
-
They tried this once in the 1930s. Not only did it fail miserably but it created a whole new subset of "criminals". Learn from history.
-
Says nothing about wine or whiskey? I'm fine only having two beers a week then.
-
I've had 3 beers this year. I'll be fine.
-
Says nothing about wine or whiskey? I'm fine only having two beers a week then.
I'll take your 2 beers, please, if you don't want them.
-
First my gas stove and now my beer?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3a/6b/ef/3a6befa7bc31a3188789236272b62c1f.gif)
-
How has this worked out in Canada? I'm not a heavy drinker but 2 beers a week is pretty much insane and bizarre.
-
How has this worked out in Canada? I'm not a heavy drinker but 2 beers a week is pretty much insane and bizarre.
Are you serious???
It is a general health RECOMMENDATION. Canada is not limiting people to two beers a week.
-
Are you serious???
It is a general health RECOMMENDATION. Canada is not limiting people to two beers a week.
I realize this cannot be enforced.
-
I realize this cannot be enforced.
There's nothing to enforce.
-
Isn’t this the equivalent of the surgeon general saying, “yea, you shouldn’t smoke,”? Maybe even less impactful.
-
Isn’t this the equivalent of the surgeon general saying, “yea, you shouldn’t smoke,”? Maybe even less impactful.
Yes. I guess that's insane and bizarre.
-
How has this worked out in Canada? I'm not a heavy drinker but 2 beers a week is pretty much insane and bizarre.
Have your two and ponder it.
-
How has this worked out in Canada? I'm not a heavy drinker but 2 beers a week is pretty much insane and bizarre.
This shouldn't even be news. Most definitely nothing to get riled up about. Alcohol isn't good for people. Since we have recommendations, they should at least be remotely accurate.
-
I googled 2 beers a week to see what the fuss was about. It's really sad that every article covering it is from a certain political slant and they are all written in a way that leads the reader to believe that there is some sort of law being passed that's going to limit FREEDOM...instead of the reality of a public health official stating something obvious.
-
2 beers per hour here.
-
I googled 2 beers a week to see what the fuss was about. It's really sad that every article covering it is from a certain political slant and they are all written in a way that leads the reader to believe that there is some sort of law being passed that's going to limit FREEDOM...instead of the reality of a public health official stating something obvious.
+1, I had to google it also, and noticed who is publicizing it, and how it is being intentionally reported in a misleading slant.
It's not even beer specific.
-
I googled 2 beers a week to see what the fuss was about. It's really sad that every article covering it is from a certain political slant and they are all written in a way that leads the reader to believe that there is some sort of law being passed that's going to limit FREEDOM...instead of the reality of a public health official stating something obvious.
Well, abusing beer or alcohol is a lot different than throwing around no more than 2 beers a week. Exactly, everyone knows this. It's the obvious moderation narrative.
-
Well, abusing beer or alcohol is a lot different than throwing around no more than 2 beers a week. Exactly, everyone knows this. It's the obvious moderation narrative.
Yet here you are all fired up…
-
Only two beers a week might put a dent in the obesity crisis as well.
-
2 beers per hour here.
That's in a "dog's week". All good.
-
Muggsy:
Seriously?
Who knew we have a "alcohol czar"?
Also Muggsy:
Well, abusing beer or alcohol is a lot different than throwing around no more than 2 beers a week. Exactly, everyone knows this. It's the obvious moderation narrative.
-
+1, I had to google it also, and noticed who is publicizing it, and how it is being intentionally reported in a misleading slant.
It's not even beer specific.
But Muggsy read about it in the WSJ
-
Now, two meals of manatee per week is a lot.
-
Now, two meals of manatee per week is a lot.
Especially if prepared in a brine with Fukushima Water.
-
Now, two meals of manatee per week is a lot.
Manatees are a unique and special species. And very cool. I'm a bit disappointed in you.
-
Now, two meals of manatee per week is a lot.
I hate to waste food, so leftovers from the first meal.
-
I hate to waste food, so leftovers from the first meal.
Manatee reheats well in the air fryer.
-
Or cut it into chunks, boil an egg, mash up an avocado, and have a Cobb salad.
-
But Muggsy read about it in the WSJ
Oh, so it must be true.
WSJ only good for financial articles and weekend section nowadays.
-
Only two beers a week might put a dent in the obesity crisis as well.
Wait, light beer still contributes to increased weight?
-
My doctor told me that 1-2 beers (or drinks) per day is good for me. He said it makes you happy, relaxes you, and has a positive effect on the heart and cholesterol levels. I am not making this up.
-
right up there with 1 square per "episode" eyn'a?
trees thru the forest people-next thing ya know, they'll be after our gas stoves, dishwashers(over 3.2 gal per cycle), gas cars, air conditioners, natural gas lines to homes, water heaters...whodathunk?? nahhhhhh they can't do this
all of this regulatory b.s. is going to cause many to start drinking...
-
This isn’t an example of regulation.
-
This isn’t an example of regulation.
no worries...everything is just fine
-
right up there with 1 square per "episode" eyn'a?
trees thru the forest people-next thing ya know, they'll be after our gas stoves, dishwashers(over 3.2 gal per cycle), gas cars, air conditioners, natural gas lines to homes, water heaters...whodathunk?? nahhhhhh they can't do this
all of this regulatory b.s. is going to cause many to start drinking...
How could you forget lawnmowers?
-
How could you forget lawnmowers?
And leaf blowers.
-
roqqet was also upset when we did away with leaded paint, asbestos, and smoking on airplanes.
-
roqqet was also upset when we did away with leaded paint, asbestos, and smoking on airplanes.
no i wasn't...so you are trying to tell me the things you listed-lead paint asbestos, etc are similar to natural gas stoves, etc? really? so your disdain for me is so strong that you can't just shut up and move on from anything you see as uneventful? so you make up some stupid chit just to say something stupid? or was it supposed to be funny? i don't even see the correlations? god you guys are friggin obtuse
-
How could you forget lawnmowers?
Personally, I'm still too pissed about banning Lawn Darts, Slap Bracelets, 3-wheelers, not to mention, root beer made with actual sassafras, to worry about anything else.
-
I miss standing up in the back of station wagons. Obviously, I was younger. And it is how I got the scar between my eyebrows. And required dental work. But man, those were the days. Stupid seatbelts and car seats.
-
no i wasn't...so you are trying to tell me the things you listed-lead paint asbestos, etc are similar to natural gas stoves, etc? really? so your disdain for me is so strong that you can't just shut up and move on from anything you see as uneventful? so you make up some stupid chit just to say something stupid? or was it supposed to be funny? i don't even see the correlations? god you guys are friggin obtuse
Do you know why it's suggested to get rid of gas stoves?
-
Do you know why it's suggested to get rid of gas stoves?
i have my thoughts, but it seems to be another "ham handed" way to regulate something that ain't there. another way to control what few feel ("moral minority")is a problem. short of nuclear, natural gas is one of the cleanest burning fossil fuels we have. so what would take the place of gas stoves? electric? ya'll know where electric comes from? a majority of it? what the hell do they want everyone to use? easy bake ovens?
if we had better alternatives ready to go, then fine. as the same can be said for EV's; until we are ready with something that people can afford and is better, these regs only serve to establish a hierarchy and push people in to unreasonable alternatives for day to day living
so the larger question becomes, WHO is really benefiting from these so called "environmentally friendly" alternatives. usually the people at the top of the chain and those who invest in these things
one other concern-many people have been unnecessarily programmed, indoctrinated in to believing all this global warming-climate change crap and that we as humans are causing it...a movement toward all these "energy efficient" things are a scare tactic...change or we are all doomed. oh, it's for climate change, then it must be all good?? the means justify the ends? gee, where have we heard that? there are veys, and there are other veys.......... not so fast dudes, china is laughing all the way to the bank while they put up more coal fired electric plants. btw, how are all those union jobs lost by lunch box joe shutting down our pipelines doing?
tell them to cut er down to 2 beers a week? they count their beers by the keg and for good reason, if they can afford it
-
i have my thoughts, but it seems to be another "ham handed" way to regulate something that ain't there. another way to control what few feel ("moral minority")is a problem. short of nuclear, natural gas is one of the cleanest burning fossil fuels we have. so what would take the place of gas stoves? electric? ya'll know where electric comes from? a majority of it? what the hell do they want everyone to use? easy bake ovens?
if we had better alternatives ready to go, then fine. as the same can be said for EV's; until we are ready with something that people can afford and is better, these regs only serve to establish a hierarchy and push people in to unreasonable alternatives for day to day living
so the larger question becomes, WHO is really benefiting from these so called "environmentally friendly" alternatives. usually the people at the top of the chain and those who invest in these things
one other concern-many people have been unnecessarily programmed, indoctrinated in to believing all this global warming-climate change crap and that we as humans are causing it...a movement toward all these "energy efficient" things are a scare tactic...change or we are all doomed. oh, it's for climate change, then it must be all good?? the means justify the ends? gee, where have we heard that? there are veys, and there are other veys.......... not so fast dudes, china is laughing all the way to the bank while they put up more coal fired electric plants. btw, how are all those union jobs lost by lunch box joe shutting down our pipelines doing?
tell them to cut er down to 2 beers a week? they count their beers by the keg and for good reason, if they can afford it
It would have been easier to just answer “no.”
-
It would have been easier to just answer “no.”
I just can't even...
Willful ignorance, climate denialism, conspiracy theories, whataboutism, and allusions to Nazi Germany all in one post. Good lord.
-
I just can't even...
Willful ignorance, climate denialism, conspiracy theories, whataboutism, and allusions to Nazi Germany all in one post. Good lord.
In the ears...out the mouth...doesn't even stop at the brain. (Not that it matters much in this case.)
-
i have my thoughts, but it seems to be another "ham handed" way to regulate something that ain't there. another way to control what few feel ("moral minority")is a problem. short of nuclear, natural gas is one of the cleanest burning fossil fuels we have. so what would take the place of gas stoves? electric? ya'll know where electric comes from? a majority of it? what the hell do they want everyone to use? easy bake ovens?
if we had better alternatives ready to go, then fine. as the same can be said for EV's; until we are ready with something that people can afford and is better, these regs only serve to establish a hierarchy and push people in to unreasonable alternatives for day to day living
so the larger question becomes, WHO is really benefiting from these so called "environmentally friendly" alternatives. usually the people at the top of the chain and those who invest in these things
one other concern-many people have been unnecessarily programmed, indoctrinated in to believing all this global warming-climate change crap and that we as humans are causing it...a movement toward all these "energy efficient" things are a scare tactic...change or we are all doomed. oh, it's for climate change, then it must be all good?? the means justify the ends? gee, where have we heard that? there are veys, and there are other veys.......... not so fast dudes, china is laughing all the way to the bank while they put up more coal fired electric plants. btw, how are all those union jobs lost by lunch box joe shutting down our pipelines doing?
tell them to cut er down to 2 beers a week? they count their beers by the keg and for good reason, if they can afford it
The suggestion of replacing gas stoves has nothing to do with any of the above.
Do you know why we stopped putting lead in gas or using asbestos?
-
It would have been easier to just answer “no.”
i know you guys are just so much smarter
-
The suggestion of replacing gas stoves has nothing to do with any of the above.
Do you know why we stopped putting lead in gas or using asbestos?
see below
-
i know you guys are just so much smarter
Yes
-
I miss standing up in the back of station wagons. Obviously, I was younger. And it is how I got the scar between my eyebrows. And required dental work. But man, those were the days. Stupid seatbelts and car seats.
As one of 4 kids in the 60s, I had a brother break his arm when we were all piled into the back of the station wagon and my mom stopped suddenly. Everyone filed it under "stuff happens".
We had a "car seat" but it wasn't about safely in a crash - it was designed to keep the youngest kid from crawling around in the car.
The worst part about being a kid in a car during that era was having parents who smoked. Either they kept the windows rolled up and we had to breathe the secondhand smoke, or they would flick the ashes out the window. Once a hot ash flew back in and hit me right in the eye.
-
Ooh I need a buzz, babe;
Guess you know it's true.
Give me brews I love, babe;
Cold IPAs will do.
Sate me, satiate me ... sate me, satiate me.
Just please don't cap me at
Two beers a week.
-
It would have been easier to just answer “no.”
Lol!
-
As one of 4 kids in the 60s, I had a brother break his arm when we were all piled into the back of the station wagon and my mom stopped suddenly. Everyone filed it under "stuff happens".
We had a "car seat" but it wasn't about safely in a crash - it was designed to keep the youngest kid from crawling around in the car.
The worst part about being a kid in a car during that era was having parents who smoked. Either they kept the windows rolled up and we had to breathe the secondhand smoke, or they would flick the ashes out the window. Once a hot ash flew back in and hit me right in the eye.
My "car seat" in the late 70s was a bouncy seat with the seat belt ran through the legs. From the seat, of course
My MIL quit smoking after she flicked an ash into my wife's eye in the backseat. 😅
-
see below
I didn't see an answer to this:
Do you know why we got rid of lead in gasoline (or paint) and why we stopped using asbestos?
-
I can do only two.
(https://i.redd.it/764tgbmbhqz11.jpg)
-
I can do only two.
(https://i.redd.it/764tgbmbhqz11.jpg)
Well played pbi.