Feds Spending Your Tax $$ On Researching A Bee Sting To the Penis! NICE!! (sarc.)

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: neo96

Seems a better alternative to the trillions lost in clean up and burial for tens of thousands that starve to death.

Last time I checked there ain't anyone starving in this country.

www.truthrevolt.org...

Sounds a lot like gluttony.

Yes because EVERYONE is overweight in this country...

11 Facts About Hunger in the US

1 in 6 people in America face hunger.

The USDA defines "food insecurity" as the lack of access, at times, to enough food for all household members. In 2011, households with children reported a significantly higher food insecurity rate than households without children: 20.6% vs. 12.2%.

Food insecurity exists in every county in America. In 2013, 17.5 million households were food insecure. More and more people are relying on food banks and pantries. Collect food outside your local supermarket for a local food bank. Sign up for Supermarket Stakeout GL.

49 million Americans struggle to put food on the table.

In the US, hunger isn’t caused by a lack of food, but rather the continued prevalence of poverty.

More than 1 in 5 children is at risk of hunger. Among African-Americans and Latinos, it’s 1 in 3.

Over 20 million children receive free or reduced-price lunch each school day. Less than half of them get breakfast, and only 10% have access to summer meal sites.

For every 100 school lunch programs, there are only 87 breakfast sites and just 36 summer food programs.

1 in 7 people are enrolled in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Nearly half of them are children.
40% of food is thrown out in the US every year, or about $165 billion worth. All of this uneaten food could feed 25 million Americans.

These 8 states have statistically higher food insecurity rates than the US national average (14.6%): Arkansas (21.2%), Mississippi (21.1%), Texas (18.0%), Tennessee (17.4%), North Carolina (17.3%), Missouri (16.9%), Georgia (16.6%), Ohio (16.0%).

All of that can be avoided if the government would force people to act responsibly. I'm willing to bet that the majority of households where children go hungry the father is not present. We can insult each other all day about whom hates the children and whom is selfish but the real reality is the PARENTS are the ones responsible for feeding their children. I was raised in a single MOTHER household and She always made sure We had breakfast and We were poor as dirt. The really sad thing is when I was young You couldn't get welfare if You had a job so no one helped there either. My father was also a dead beat whom didn't pay a dime in child support and the state refused to hold Him accountable. So how is it My mother could put breakfast on our table but today mothers don't have the means to put breakfast on the table? As far as I am concerned it's not an issue of can't it's an issue of won't put breakfast on the table for most hungry children.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Gryphon66

I think that's the very definition of selective lol.

Seems to be a similar function to "smaller government" ... smaller government until a right winger wants the government in our bedrooms or in our pants or giving special rights to religious groups, or trillions to the military industrial complex etc. etc.

Then, its "America! Patriotism! The Flag!"

/cue National Anthem

You mean until it comes to the evil rich persons wallet or bank account, the gun owners closet, healthcare, and trying to control the entire planet.

Yeah 'liberals' sure want 'smaller government' now don't they?

How surprising! A litany of right-wing talking points.

No, liberals don't lie and cry about "smaller government" ... in general they want government to do its job (national defense, general welfare, infrastructure, etc.) and then stay the hell out of their lives.

Conservatives are the ones who continually whine smaller government right up until they're passing more laws to take more personal freedoms away.

/shrug

Does that freedom include the freedom from personal responsibility?

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
Remember this: Capitalism as it stands in the US and many other countries on the planet is slavery, with chains made of debt and worry instead of iron and steel.

Yeah lets replace it with communism which is another form of slavery. If You haven't noticed all governments have oppressed the people and will continue to do so until Man is smart enough to live without them.

Next newsflash ---men will be stocking up on bees in hopes of a swelling effect. lol.

I've known some very odd studies that have received grant monies for research.. I'm surprised with the, er, regressive people we have now, that this is still permitted. Ya know, change is bad, scientists are wrong, maintain the status quo, yap yap yap.

a reply to: jkm1864

All your anecdote proves is that you had a terrible father. Just because you had a terrible father doesn't mean that ALL single parent homes are broken homes.

11 Myths about single parents - and why you shouldn't believe them

Myth: A single parent home is a broken home.

Truth: The idea that a home is “broken” simply because the parents are divorced or were never married to begin with is ridiculous and in some cases, downright offensive. The truth is many single parent homes are now whole. The home was broken while the single parent lived in a marriage that was unhappy, abusive, or non-monogamous due to their spouse's infidelity. The fighting, yelling, cold silences, slammed doors and other things that occurred in those homes were more destructive to the child's upbringing than living in a peaceful, calm home with one parent. Single parents often find themselves better able to care for their children because they are now happy, and no longer worrying about what might happen when their spouse arrives home.

PS: How does the government force people to act responsibly, as you suggest? That comment sounds pretty authoritarian to me.

a reply to: jkm1864

And the part of my post where I suggest replacing it with Communism is... Where, exactly?

Communism is worse than getting your penis stuck in a bee hive.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: jkm1864

All your anecdote proves is that you had a terrible father. Just because you had a terrible father doesn't mean that ALL single parent homes are broken homes.

11 Myths about single parents - and why you shouldn't believe them

Myth: A single parent home is a broken home.

Truth: The idea that a home is “broken” simply because the parents are divorced or were never married to begin with is ridiculous and in some cases, downright offensive. The truth is many single parent homes are now whole. The home was broken while the single parent lived in a marriage that was unhappy, abusive, or non-monogamous due to their spouse's infidelity. The fighting, yelling, cold silences, slammed doors and other things that occurred in those homes were more destructive to the child's upbringing than living in a peaceful, calm home with one parent. Single parents often find themselves better able to care for their children because they are now happy, and no longer worrying about what might happen when their spouse arrives home.

PS: How does the government force people to act responsibly, as you suggest? That comment sounds pretty authoritarian to me.

Actually they do it all the time. In Texas if You don't pay child support You get thrown in jail. It takes two to make a child so two people should be held responsible for making that child. The issue isn't parents that can't live together it's parents that refuse to be responsible adults and work toward supporting their own children which leads to hungry children.

originally posted by: jkm1864
Actually they do it all the time. In Texas if You don't pay child support You get thrown in jail. It takes two to make a child so two people should be held responsible for making that child. The issue isn't parents that can't live together it's parents that refuse to be responsible adults and work toward supporting their own children which leads to hungry children.

How does putting a parent in jail force that parent to act responsibly? How does someone in jail take care of a child? Seems like that would just fuel the problem instead.

a reply to: paxnatus

No wonder we in America are in such an economic crisis! If the federal government cannot find anything better to do with our tax dollars, than fund a ridiculous research study like this well we are headed to hell, period......Truly a pathetic excuse and waste of our money.....

The War On Terror Has Cost Taxpayers $1.7 Trillion

Maybe you need to get your priorities in order

ETA: your link doesn't work

Also:
Ig Nobel Prize

The Ig Nobel Prizes is a parody of the Nobel Prizes and is given out in early October each year for ten unusual or trivial achievements in scientific research.

The stated aim of the prizes is to "honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think". The awards are sometimes veiled criticism (or gentle satire), but are also used to point out that even the most absurd-sounding avenues of research can yield useful knowledge.

How much money did bee sting guy get for his peer reviewed paper? I can't seem to find that information anywhere...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: paxnatus

Can you define science that is wasteful versus beneficial? You can't know how beneficial a study is until it is completed and the results compiled. Of all the topics and things people complaining about government wasting money on, science is probably the dumbest. Just because you don't find the information useful doesn't mean that it can't be useful. Nothing dumber than calling increasing the human knowledgebase a waste of money.

I mean you are complaining about $50,000 spent on a study while the government is dumping BILLIONS into wars, death, destruction, and other stuff that we find questionable. Get your priorities straight...

PS: Your link doesn't work.

Just how pertinent is it for society to know where the most painful location to get stung by a bee is?
Just how pertinent is it for society to know how feminine Republican women are vs. Democratic Women?
Just how pertinent is it for society to know how much more or less mothers love their dogs vs. their kids?
Just how pertinent is it for society to know just how angry people actually get when they are hungry? (Hangry)
Just how pertinent is it for society to know the swirl patterns sea monkeys make when they swim in groups?

Stupid # like this has no practical benefit, and yet the government spends countless millions giving it to scientists and our Universities to study.

originally posted by: chuck258
Just how pertinent is it for society to know where the most painful location to get stung by a bee is?

Read the study and find out what the conclusions are as well as why the study was carried out in the first place. Then come to your own opinion.

Just how pertinent is it for society to know how feminine Republican women are vs. Democratic Women?

Read the study and find out what the conclusions are as well as why the study was carried out in the first place. Then come to your own opinion.

Just how pertinent is it for society to know how much more or less mothers love their dogs vs. their kids?

Read the study and find out what the conclusions are as well as why the study was carried out in the first place. Then come to your own opinion.

Just how pertinent is it for society to know just how angry people actually get when they are hungry? (Hangry)

Read the study and find out what the conclusions are as well as why the study was carried out in the first place. Then come to your own opinion.

Just how pertinent is it for society to know the swirl patterns sea monkeys make when they swim in groups?

Read the study and find out what the conclusions are as well as why the study was carried out in the first place. Then come to your own opinion.

Stupid # like this has no practical benefit, and yet the government spends countless millions giving it to scientists and our Universities to study.

You don't know that. You are just making a statement because you read their titles and jumped to conclusions. I'm going to link you to this post from earlier in the thread where someone tried this very same tactic for a study involving Chinese prostitutes getting drunk. I looked it up and showed that the story presented in the media distorted the study as well as the reasoning for why it was carried out. The same is probably true for the examples you gave above, so unless you've thoroughly researched each of those studies you cited above, I am just going to dismiss your entire point.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: neo96

America?

Not so much.

But, they are.

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: paxnatus
And some people want bigger government.....SMH.

For government engorgements lasting longer than 4 years, seek impeachment assistance immediately.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Communism is worse than getting your penis stuck in a bee hive.

Sure is.

IT's death by a thousand cuts.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Communism is worse than getting your penis stuck in a bee hive.

There are some sick freaks in the world that probably get off on those sort of things.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This is your chance to defend the stupidity of our government. Here is a list of 15 ridiculous studies that the government has thrown money away on!!



1. Why some people see Jesus’ face on toast ($3.5 million*)

2. Do drunk birds slur when they sing? ($5 million*)

3.Does coc aine make honey bees dance? ($243,000*)

4.What type of music do monkeys and chimpanzees prefer to listen to? ($1 million*)

5.Why is yawning contagious? ($1 million*)

6.Why does walking with coffee cause it to spill? ($172,000*)

7.Are cheerleaders more attractive in a squad? ($1.1 million*)

8. Who will be America’s next top model? ($2.9 million*)

9.What makes goldfish feel sexy? ($3.9 million*)

10.10. Do Republicans and Democrats look different? (50,000)

11. Could you outrun a dinosaur? (1.9 million)

12. How long does it take to pee like a race horse? (331,000)

13. Is being Liberal a choice or genetic? (2.6 million)

14. what are the most popular emoticons used in text messages by College students? (561,000)

15. How many shakes does it take a wet dog to dry off? (331,000)

So go ahead and defend this colossal waste of money!

pax

www.flake.senate.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink">LINK

a reply to: paxnatus

The total cost of those studies equates to 0.001% of the cost of the war on terror. You would literally need 100,000 of them (the entire group of studies you had listed them, 100,000 times over) for the cost to be equal. If we assume the costs average out, that's 1,500,000 individual studies. And unlike the war on terror, bits of research are actually positive things (even if you personally think they're not worth it.) Even still, the figure I'm using for the war on terror (1.7 trillion) likely doesn't even take into account the war's economic effects and other effects, such as on people's lives (PTSD). Just its direct cost.
Even if that's incorrect, and 1.7 trillion is a total list of damages, it's still absurd for a war that, as many people believe, has really only made things worse.

a reply to: paxnatus

Eilasvaleleyn said all that needed to be said about this here.

Besides, just reading the title of the study isn't going to tell you if it is a waste of money or not.

Bah! Poor bee has only 1 sting in it.

Hornets have a barbless stinger, much better and less cruel to the insect.

Now it's nothing compared to vagina dentata.

Talk about painful! I've only heard about it, thank heavens.