A Good Memory
Hey, it's Emily. 15. This is pretty much filled with Roosterteeth and Marvel, occasionally Supernatural and Harry Potter. And y'know whatever else holds my interest. Recent influx of RvB, Really not sorry if I get distracted with the reds and blues. About me can be found here. Have a good day!
i
c
u
K
R

runecestershire:

shakespeaker:

placebonacebo:

So my school is putting on a production of Macbeth and not enough guys tried out so instead of having a girl play male Macbeth, our direction said, “Fuck it, we’re doing Lesbian Macbeth”

This is the best possible solution.

I most heartily approve of this because it is awesome.

8 hours ago | J | 63,300 notes

ichidou:

the international dibs protocol

8 hours ago | J | 1,947 notes

wowsteven29:

howigothealthy:

sodamnrelatable:

Two scientists walk into a bar

The first says “I’ll have some H2O.”

The second says “I’ll have some H2O, too.”

Both of them receive water because the bartender is not irresponsible enough to serve concentrated hydrogen peroxide as a drink.

image

THAT GIF

the other versionimage

8 hours ago | J | 418,852 notes

mrs-420:

LETS TALK ABOUT THIS FOR A FUCKING MINUTE.

8 hours ago | J | 376,853 notes

ororosmunroe:

wintersoldeirs:

instead of putting tony stark in everything we should just put sam wilson in everything who agrees c’mon let’s start a revolt

  (via kamalaskadoosh)

8 hours ago | J | 2,812 notes
(I work the floor at an independently-owned menswear store. The owner, my boss, spends a lot of time at the shop, and tries to keep prices as low as possible to help our city’s large homeless population get good job interview clothes. A clearly homeless man is wandering around the store. The other patrons are giving him looks.)
Customer: “Excuse me, sir?”
Me: “Yes, ma’am?”
Customer: “I think you may want to call security. That… bum over there, he keeps feeling the suits and muttering to himself. I’m just sure he’s planning to steal one.”
Me: “Well, ma’am, I think that’s quite unlikely.”
Customer: “Oh, come on, you know how they are! I mean, I’d keep an eye on him even if he wasn’t homeless!”
(The homeless man in question happens to be Hispanic.)
Me: “We don’t discriminate here, ma’am.”
Customer: “Well, I’m sure the owner would want to hear about this!”
(I give in and call him over. The customer explains her concerns. As a black man, my boss isn’t happy with her racism, but agrees to talk to the homeless man.)
Owner: “Excuse me, sir, are you finding what you need?”
Homeless Man: “Well, not really. I’m hoping for something versatile in a dark or navy wool, but most of the options in my size are cut American style instead of European, which fits me a little better. Not to mention they’re all pinstriped, which I really don’t have the build for, you know?”
Owner: “I… yes, I understand. I think we may have some options over here, if you’ll follow me. How did you know all that?”
Homeless Man: “Back before I lost my job, I used to be really into this stuff. I’m not looking for anything fancy, just something I can use to look good for a job interview later today.”
(My boss helps him find something he likes, and comes to the counter with him. The suit is priced at $87.)
Homeless Man: *digging in his pockets* “Hang on, I think I’ve got enough.”
Owner: *to me* “Take my card. I’m buying it for him.” *to the homeless man* “Here. The suit’s yours, on one condition. After your interview today, you come back and apply for a job here too. Got it?”
Homeless Man: “I… oh my God, thank you. Thank you so much.”
(Two years later, that formerly-homeless man is my manager, and has a little girl with his new wife—the owner’s sister.)
8 hours ago | J | 229,164 notes

geekymerch:

These awesome Superhero/Supervillain stained glass window prints can be found at the fantastic Fay Productions on Etsy!

8 hours ago | J | 682 notes
archiaart:

anarcho-queer:

ibetyourphysiquehelps:

WHOA WHOA WHOA. excuse me.But the minimum wage is set for teenagers with first jobs/ college students TO GET EXPERIENCE. Because a higher paying job isn’t going to higher you unless ypu have experience. AND YOU GET THAT EXPERIENCE BY WORKING AT MINIMUM PAYING JOBS. and the higher paying jobs are harder jobs which is why they get more money. If you raise the minimum wage, then companies wont have the money to pay more employees so they look for the people with the most experience…So if companies can only higher people with experience and you dont have any because companies DONT HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY YOU?? well then you are never going to get a job. And when the minimum wage goes up, the price of everything goes up.And then we have the minimum wage earners complaining again.So stop saying that the minimum wage needs to be raised because it doesnt.What needs to happen is we need a better economy and thanks to obama, thats not going to happen for a while because obama doesn’t know what hes doing.So if you want to make more money, get experience and a better paying job.

You’re a shitty economist buddy.
Less than 15% of minimum wage worker’s are teenagers (age 14-19), the rest are adults aged 20 and over (85.7%). So lets stop pretending that these jobs are meant for students. The economy is shit and unfortunately, people have to settle for low wages because the alternative often is unemployment.
Higher paying jobs doesn’t equate to ‘harder jobs’. Often, the higher a position is, the less labor you are required to do.
"And when the minimum wage goes up, the price of everything goes up."
Inflation doesn’t necessarily work that way. Obviously, you’re just regurgitating the bullshit theories conservatives spew out while disregarding the statistics and history that proves otherwise. But since you’re using that argument, why not raise the minimum wage with the rise of inflation? Or productivity even?
If we had raised the minimum wage with the rise of productivity since 1968, it would currently be $21.72. In other words, we are creating far more and producing more profit for corporations, while being paid for a third of what we use to.
What do you have to say about that?
And raising the minimum wage to $10.10 will raise 1.7 million families out of poverty and reduce the need for them to use public assistance, saving the federal government $7.6 billion per year. Would you say you’re you against that?
The current federal minimum wage is $7.25. In none of the 50 states is that enough money to pay the average rent for a 2-bedroom apartment. 
The minimum wage used to be able to keep a family of 3 above the poverty line. Now, the minimum wage can’t even keep a single parent working 40 hours a week, for an entire year without a single day off, above the poverty line.
When you raise the minimum wage, you’re putting more money into the pockets of the lower/working class. Their money is directly put back into the economy when the buy food, pay bills and generally spend their money. As oppose to higher paid people who have the luxury of saving their earnings. That means that businesses will generally make more money because the working class has more money to spend.
That’s my argument for raising the minimum wage, I would love to see your attempt to counter it.

I agree with you anarcho-queer, and I think the people protesting minimum wage increases should take a moment to self-reflect and assess their own values, see if they can feel compassion for the suffering of their fellow humans. There is another angle we can consider too. Some think we should create a maximum wage. To illustrate, here is a nice section from an article posted in 2012 (New Zealand Herald):

Reducing wages to create employment has the potential to work, but not the way the Government is implying. The wages which need to be reduced are those of the CEOs and other high-level management positions.
Former Telecom CEO Paul Reynolds is the often-referenced example of how salaries for those at the top of the pyramid have become obscene. […] Reynolds “earned $30 million in five years with the company”. That figure - made up of base salaries, performance incentives, share incentives, etc. - equates to $6 million a year.
What did Reynolds do to become the $6 million man? It is something of a mystery. Under his leadership, Telecom dropped from top place on the NZSX - a position it had occupied since 1991 - following the XT debacle in 2010. Share prices plummeted. Reynolds’ response was to go fishing. Despite all this, Reynolds was, according to the Herald, earning $34,000 a day during the 2012 financial year.
Supporters of such excesses claim these CEOs add value and help grow their companies. Why, then, do CEOs who do the opposite - such as Reynolds - still receive such engorged salaries? If they were on the factory floor, they would have lost their job by now. Furthermore, such justifications for CEO salaries tend to insult workers whose efforts do add value to, and grow, the company. If this seems far-fetched, consider what would bring Telecom to a halt: a strike by its engineers, or a strike by its CEO?

Workers create value. They just never see it, it is passed on to the CEOs and shareholders. But they have power when they act as a collective. Why else do you think the powerful get so angry whenever their wage slaves go on strike? And their pet media immediately paints the strikers as greedy? It’s because they are afraid of the power we all have. Their jobs are meaningless without the workers on the ground floor.

archiaart:

anarcho-queer:

ibetyourphysiquehelps:

WHOA WHOA WHOA.
excuse me.
But the minimum wage is set for teenagers with first jobs/ college students TO GET EXPERIENCE. Because a higher paying job isn’t going to higher you unless ypu have experience. AND YOU GET THAT EXPERIENCE BY WORKING AT MINIMUM PAYING JOBS. and the higher paying jobs are harder jobs which is why they get more money.
If you raise the minimum wage, then companies wont have the money to pay more employees so they look for the people with the most experience…
So if companies can only higher people with experience and you dont have any because companies DONT HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY YOU??
well then you are never going to get a job.
And when the minimum wage goes up, the price of everything goes up.
And then we have the minimum wage earners complaining again.
So stop saying that the minimum wage needs to be raised because it doesnt.
What needs to happen is we need a better economy and thanks to obama, thats not going to happen for a while because obama doesn’t know what hes doing.
So if you want to make more money, get experience and a better paying job.

You’re a shitty economist buddy.

Less than 15% of minimum wage worker’s are teenagers (age 14-19), the rest are adults aged 20 and over (85.7%). So lets stop pretending that these jobs are meant for students. The economy is shit and unfortunately, people have to settle for low wages because the alternative often is unemployment.

Higher paying jobs doesn’t equate to ‘harder jobs’. Often, the higher a position is, the less labor you are required to do.

"And when the minimum wage goes up, the price of everything goes up."

Inflation doesn’t necessarily work that way. Obviously, you’re just regurgitating the bullshit theories conservatives spew out while disregarding the statistics and history that proves otherwise. But since you’re using that argument, why not raise the minimum wage with the rise of inflation? Or productivity even?

If we had raised the minimum wage with the rise of productivity since 1968, it would currently be $21.72. In other words, we are creating far more and producing more profit for corporations, while being paid for a third of what we use to.

What do you have to say about that?

And raising the minimum wage to $10.10 will raise 1.7 million families out of poverty and reduce the need for them to use public assistance, saving the federal government $7.6 billion per year. Would you say you’re you against that?

The current federal minimum wage is $7.25. In none of the 50 states is that enough money to pay the average rent for a 2-bedroom apartment.

The minimum wage used to be able to keep a family of 3 above the poverty line. Now, the minimum wage can’t even keep a single parent working 40 hours a week, for an entire year without a single day off, above the poverty line.

When you raise the minimum wage, you’re putting more money into the pockets of the lower/working class. Their money is directly put back into the economy when the buy food, pay bills and generally spend their money. As oppose to higher paid people who have the luxury of saving their earnings. That means that businesses will generally make more money because the working class has more money to spend.

That’s my argument for raising the minimum wage, I would love to see your attempt to counter it.

I agree with you anarcho-queer, and I think the people protesting minimum wage increases should take a moment to self-reflect and assess their own values, see if they can feel compassion for the suffering of their fellow humans. There is another angle we can consider too. Some think we should create a maximum wage. To illustrate, here is a nice section from an article posted in 2012 (New Zealand Herald):

Reducing wages to create employment has the potential to work, but not the way the Government is implying. The wages which need to be reduced are those of the CEOs and other high-level management positions.

Former Telecom CEO Paul Reynolds is the often-referenced example of how salaries for those at the top of the pyramid have become obscene. […] Reynolds “earned $30 million in five years with the company”. That figure - made up of base salaries, performance incentives, share incentives, etc. - equates to $6 million a year.

What did Reynolds do to become the $6 million man? It is something of a mystery. Under his leadership, Telecom dropped from top place on the NZSX - a position it had occupied since 1991 - following the XT debacle in 2010. Share prices plummeted. Reynolds’ response was to go fishing. Despite all this, Reynolds was, according to the Herald, earning $34,000 a day during the 2012 financial year.

Supporters of such excesses claim these CEOs add value and help grow their companies. Why, then, do CEOs who do the opposite - such as Reynolds - still receive such engorged salaries? If they were on the factory floor, they would have lost their job by now. Furthermore, such justifications for CEO salaries tend to insult workers whose efforts do add value to, and grow, the company. If this seems far-fetched, consider what would bring Telecom to a halt: a strike by its engineers, or a strike by its CEO?

Workers create value. They just never see it, it is passed on to the CEOs and shareholders. But they have power when they act as a collective. Why else do you think the powerful get so angry whenever their wage slaves go on strike? And their pet media immediately paints the strikers as greedy? It’s because they are afraid of the power we all have. Their jobs are meaningless without the workers on the ground floor.

8 hours ago | J | 16,262 notes

thatpsychowriter:

thatpsychowriter:

i have to make a poster about “christopher columbus’s discovery of america” for school

i’m gonna have a real hard time holding back the sarcasm wish me luck

image

i failed

8 hours ago | J | 1,614 notes

wholetjackdrive:

pancakereport:

thinkingupblognamesishard:

newandclassicemo:

A high school banned the marching band from playing Fall Out Boy songs because the lyrics were suggestive.

A marching band

Isn’t allowed to play Fall Out Boy 

Because of suggestive lyrics

Marching bands are instrumental

The High School Band Can’t Play Fall Out Boy Songs Because The Lyrics Are Suggestive by Panic! At The Disco.

TO SEE A MARCHING BAND

this whole post is an emo train wreck and i love it

8 hours ago | J | 180,206 notes
n4ut:

dinkum-thinkum:

twincanine:

dinkum-thinkum:

fucking incredible

we’re getting the band back together.

"The Thrill of One More Kill" 2014 reunion tour

The glory

n4ut:

dinkum-thinkum:

twincanine:

dinkum-thinkum:

fucking incredible

we’re getting the band back together.

"The Thrill of One More Kill" 2014 reunion tour

The glory

8 hours ago | J | 309 notes

angrylolita:

basedgosh:

*pretends to understand the movie reference you just made*

yeah, stay gold too, horse man…………………………whatever that means…………….

8 hours ago | J | 156,084 notes
thetrekkiehasthephonebox:

fandomcollector:

electrikmoonlight:

mildserendipity:

WTF I LIETERALLY THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT DOGS UNTIL NOW I AM 20 YEARS OLD

of course it was, why would he actually sing about real dogs and why they got out

No it isn’t. It’s actually talking about the men who predate upon women in clubs, calling them dogs, not ‘ugly women’. Just look at the lyrics:
And tell the fellas stop the name callin’Yepee ah yoThen them girls respond to the callI hear a woman shout outWho let the dogs outWoof, woof, woof, woof, woof
Or if that isn’t clear enough for you that it’s women quite clearly calling the men dogs then read this next bit:
Get back gruffy, mash scruffyGet back you flea infested mongrelNow I tell meh self dem man go get angryAh yepee ah yoTo hear them girls calling them canine
It’s saying that men who attack women for being ‘ugly’ or refuse to leave them alone are worse than stray mongrels! It plainly points out that women do not want or appreciate the attention and so taunt them with the verse of ‘who let the dogs out’ because they are both unable to control themselves and vile little creatures. Learn to do some fucking research.

Oh.

thetrekkiehasthephonebox:

fandomcollector:

electrikmoonlight:

mildserendipity:

WTF I LIETERALLY THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT DOGS UNTIL NOW I AM 20 YEARS OLD

of course it was, why would he actually sing about real dogs and why they got out

No it isn’t. It’s actually talking about the men who predate upon women in clubs, calling them dogs, not ‘ugly women’. Just look at the lyrics:

And tell the fellas stop the name callin
Yepee ah yo
Then them girls respond to the call
I hear a woman shout out
Who let the dogs out
Woof, woof, woof, woof, woof

Or if that isn’t clear enough for you that it’s women quite clearly calling the men dogs then read this next bit:

Get back gruffy, mash scruffy
Get back you flea infested mongrel
Now I tell meh self dem man go get angry
Ah yepee ah yo
To hear them girls calling them canine

It’s saying that men who attack women for being ‘ugly’ or refuse to leave them alone are worse than stray mongrels! It plainly points out that women do not want or appreciate the attention and so taunt them with the verse of ‘who let the dogs out’ because they are both unable to control themselves and vile little creatures. Learn to do some fucking research.

Oh.

8 hours ago | J | 128,156 notes

spookybaltimore:

HEAVY METAL BROKE MY

8 hours ago | J | 4,877 notes

spookybaltimore:

[DUN DUN]

8 hours ago | J | 3,366 notes