*Did somebody say oil*?

omfg what if we started a meme that measures the price of shit compared to Greenland?

NASA is 0.375 greenlands

😂

Quick, give me stupidly expensive things to compare the price to

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/16/trump-wants-buy-greenland-how-much-would-it-cost/

total welfare spending is 2.287 trillion

$1.7 Trillion

looks like that's not counting medicare

(574bn)

US military budget equals 12.4 Greenlands

anyway welfare is 30-40 greenlands

depending on whether you include medicare

The article was 1.7 trillion adjusted for inflation from the last offer

https://www.quora.com/How-much-money-do-you-think-it-would-take-for-Denmark-to-sell-Greenland

savage

He moved to the wrong place

The dream exists, it's just not in the cities

but most people live in cities now

<:HonkHonk:566814473646768128>

And most people are retarded

watching this, I like to play the game of 'how many of these people have regular jobs and how many are only working part time, and how many are full time pracitcing this and not working at all?' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOCoL_-0FEA

@Tero people easily call fake on anons

how u mean

well there's evidence it's real

no evidence rather

Which search engines do you guys use?

duckduckgo

bing 😎

anons do have a healthy dose of suspicion a lot of the time

anons are free to believed or disbelieved - I just wish their claims would have more citations, because then they'd have more influence

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7361427/Former-banker-spends-75-000-surgery-transspecies-reptilian.html

uh huh

I mean, I'd probably just never get out of bed

rather than make myself a laughing stock

well there's two ways to gain influence

well more than two

but appealing to citations is actually pretty flimsy imo, because you can find a citation to support a ton of false beliefs

and to make things worse, this problem is most pronounced in the soft sciences like medicine, psychology, sociology, economics, etc. - the exact topics you might want to be citing if you're talking about politics

these fields do a lot of opinion peddling disguised as science with poor study designs and weak reasoning

plus at the very deep level with politics, the questions become such that they are not amenable to empirical study,
like
say we know that a certain amount of diversity causes a certain amount of eroding in social trust, increase in anxiety disorders and depression
but it also boosts the GDP some amount and helps businesses grow
and we want to know is that a worthwhile tradeoff? there's no way to answer this scientifically as it's a value judgment