Dave

Staff member
They are replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20 with Harriet Tubman. I'm totally okay with this. I think a lot of people (especially in the south) are going to complain about "teh liberlz!!!" but I think she's a good choice.
 
Interesting.

It's funny how the first article I read about it managed to contradict itself within 2 paragraphs - "first time a woman appears on a US bill" and "earlier, Martha Washington and Pocahontas have appeared on bills".
 
They are replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20 with Harriet Tubman. I'm totally okay with this. I think a lot of people (especially in the south) are going to complain about "teh liberlz!!!" but I think she's a good choice.
Just remind them that we're replacing a racist democrat with a card carrying republican on the $20 bill.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
They are replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20 with Harriet Tubman. I'm totally okay with this. I think a lot of people (especially in the south) are going to complain about "teh liberlz!!!" but I think she's a good choice.
My issue is why was this even considered to be useful way for the government to spend time? Who was the person who decided, "You know what issue we really need to tackle right now? The person who is on the $20 bill."

I can understand the need to update the bill if counterfeiting technology is catching up and they need to make it harder to forge or something, but this is just the lowest form of political make work and pandering.

Besides, I can count the number of times I handled paper money in the last year on one hand. But by all means, let's polish some more door knobs on the Titanic.
 
Is it wrong to go to a job interview for a job you're about 98% sure you plan on turning down, anyway? Because I'm in that position right now.

I was offered a job (someone saw my resume on online) and offered an interview. I accepted. However, looking more into the job and the potential job, it sounds like a door-to-door or possibly cold-calling, commission based sales job. Which, I mean, ick.
So I'm a complete moron. The interview is tomorrow, not today.
 
My issue is why was this even considered to be useful way for the government to spend time? Who was the person who decided, "You know what issue we really need to tackle right now? The person who is on the $20 bill."

I can understand the need to update the bill if counterfeiting technology is catching up and they need to make it harder to forge or something, but this is just the lowest form of political make work and pandering.

Besides, I can count the number of times I handled paper money in the last year on one hand. But by all means, let's polish some more door knobs on the Titanic.
They have to redesign the bills periodically anyway, both for anti-counterfeiting and to deal with worn master plates, so there's no additional cost to change the image on the bill.
 
There is additional costs, but in the scheme of things, the costs are cheap. Like paying a small commission and the artist to make the change.

Now they are telling us that it will take until 2030 before they can make the change. While it pisses off the the people pushing for $20 by 2020, I think the real reason is the Fed will change from paper/rag currency to plastic then.
 
My issue is why was this even considered to be useful way for the government to spend time? Who was the person who decided, "You know what issue we really need to tackle right now? The person who is on the $20 bill."
Probably a promotional gimmick for an upcoming Sojourner Truth biopic.

--Patrick
 
Somewhere out there is a guy or gal who has collected every copy of Highlights, and I find that amazing.

ON THE TOPIC-I wish there were trades of those Boy-scout comics I read as a kid, they were fun.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
The comic I remember most from Boys' Life is Pee Wee Harris.

I just googled it though, and apparently it has REALLY changed in the last 30 years.
 
The comic I remember most from Boys' Life is Pee Wee Harris.

I just googled it though, and apparently it has REALLY changed in the last 30 years.
They all have. You need to remember that the Boy Scouts were a mostly open organization until the late 90's, which is when the Mormons started controlling it a lot more and made it a bit more hostile for the non-religious and such. Boy's Life is a reflection of that, so the content has shifted subtly over the years.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
They all have. You need to remember that the Boy Scouts were a mostly open organization until the late 90's, which is when the Mormons started controlling it a lot more and made it a bit more hostile for the non-religious and such. Boy's Life is a reflection of that, so the content has shifted subtly over the years.
Well, I was more referring to the art style, but I have no reason to doubt you.

What I meant was, it used to look Archies-meets-Dennis-the-Menace and now it looks more... I dunno, Spongebob-meets-Chowder?
 
Well, I was more referring to the art style, but I have no reason to doubt you.

What I meant was, it used to look Archies-meets-Dennis-the-Menace and now it looks more... I dunno, Spongebob-meets-Chowder?
I miss when cartoons weren't all amorphous, flat-color blobs with noodley appendages.
 
They all have. You need to remember that the Boy Scouts were a mostly open organization until the late 90's, which is when the Mormons started controlling it a lot more and made it a bit more hostile for the non-religious and such. Boy's Life is a reflection of that, so the content has shifted subtly over the years.
I'd like to understand this better, what references or articles show this?
 
My issue is why was this even considered to be useful way for the government to spend time? Who was the person who decided, "You know what issue we really need to tackle right now? The person who is on the $20 bill."

I can understand the need to update the bill if counterfeiting technology is catching up and they need to make it harder to forge or something, but this is just the lowest form of political make work and pandering.

Besides, I can count the number of times I handled paper money in the last year on one hand. But by all means, let's polish some more door knobs on the Titanic.
Good thing you don't live up here. The things we do with our money would freak you out.

For example, we essentially get a new quarter every month.
 
My wife has been giving baby Q a bath in the tub with her. He likes to "swim" around, and you can't really do that in a sink or baby tub. So he's in there with her tonight, sitting on her knee, and I say "damn that would be funny if he crapped right now." He has a pretty good poop schedule right now, maybe once every 4-5 days, and he just pooped earlier in the day, so I knew he wouldn't. Well...

He proceeded to give a little squirt. We start laughing, good times and all. Just a little poop on the leg. Then he lets loose. Mother of God, I have never seen anything like that before. It wasn't like when you crap in a lake and try to outrun the floater. Poop filled the entire tub. It was like one giant shit stew. The look on my poor wife's face. I still can't believe it.

I quick opened the drain and turned on the shower. I guess that's why people don't do that.
 
I'd like to understand this better, what references or articles show this?
First, some info:
Scouting Handbook for Church Units in the United States (This is what the church used to issue to Wards in regards to Scouting) (Here is an updated 2015 version)
The Truth About LDS Scouting (A fairly pro-LDS take on numbers)

It's a bit difficult to shift though the articles that AREN'T opinion pieces regarding this, but the issue seems to be this:

- Look at Page 8 of the handbook. It mentions the registration process for Scouts and mentions that the roster list include all boys ages 8 through 15, along with certain 16-17. This means all Mormon boys in the Ward/Unit between those ages. Also notice that the Church pays for all registration fees for these boys. Many of these boys aren't actually involved with Scouting, but their fees get paid regardless.

- Look at the second link or read this quote.
Scouting in the LDS church today

Scouting in the LDS church continues to thrive today. The LDS church sponsors 38,168 units and 449,077 boys in the program, meaning it’s the BSA’s largest chartered organization.
The majority of LDS Scouting units are in Utah and Idaho, where a large population of church members reside. But there are also plenty of LDS units across the nation.
Francis says there are 151 BSA councils with LDS-BSA Relationships committees that work to support and strengthen the partnership. That’s more than half of all councils.
What this means is that the LDS effectively controls the purse strings of the BSA and can dictate policy because it knows that many of the Western councils (situated in low population areas) simply can't exist without the influx of the cash from the LDS. So if the BSA wants scouting to be available to the most members, it has to do what the LDS says. Worse, all other Units and Religious Organizations involved with Scouting ALSO have to conform with the policy set by the LDS for the BSA, even if they disagree with them. That's why BSA v. Dale was such a huge deal: the LDS threatened to walk out if the BSA didn't fight the lawsuit tooth and claw. The BSA was later allowed to change their policy to allow gay members and leaders when litigation costs became too expensive and the policy threatened the existence of the organization, but that was not a fight it won easily.

But it's worse than that: because of how the LDS operates it's units, some of the people involved aren't familiar with the program. Basically, the LDS treats being a Scoutmaster as simply another church duty; churches can and do call members to serve the church in that capacity. This means that many of the people involved aren't motivated and the boys in the program aren't getting as much out of it as they could. But these under performing troops still operate because it's how the LDS remains in control.
 
Well, I suppose I'll have to come back with more detail, but none of what you said supports your argument that
... the Boy Scouts were a mostly open organization until the late 90's, which is when the Mormons started controlling it a lot more and made it a bit more hostile for the non-religious and such.
I'm very well aware of the links you've posted, as I'm not only a member of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (i.e. Mormon), but I'm a cubmaster for the Cubscout pack in my congregation, and have been involved in scouting since the '80s both as a youth and later as a leader in several capacities. I did not see the shift you allude to, so I assumed it was something I simply didn't notice from with the organization, but since you haven't provided evidence of a shift at all then it's still not clear to me what you're talking about.
 
Well, I suppose I'll have to come back with more detail, but none of what you said supports your argument that


I'm very well aware of the links you've posted, as I'm not only a member of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (i.e. Mormon), but I'm a cubmaster for the Cubscout pack in my congregation, and have been involved in scouting since the '80s both as a youth and later as a leader in several capacities. I did not see the shift you allude to, so I assumed it was something I simply didn't notice from with the organization, but since you haven't provided evidence of a shift at all then it's still not clear to me what you're talking about.
I know that it was an on-going issue in my Cub pack and Scout troop during the late 90's and early 2000's, where it was made clear that certain people would no longer be allowed involvement in the organization at a higher level. The Simon Kenton Council (and others nearby, like Tecumseh and Ohio River) had a bit of a shake-up in the leadership after that and a lot of long standing traditions (like the Columbus Scout Show Convention) were dropped in favor of a renewed focus on faith-based activities. This was about the time of my... incident and when I left the organization so I can't really comment past 2001 on a personal level, nor provide more than anecdotal evidence before that. I DO know that since about 2014 they've had renewed interest a lot of the traditions we lost during that shake-up, mostly as scouts I'd served with have become involved in the organization as parents.

To be fair, I know of many Cub and Scout troops who are still able to (mostly) operate independently. It may have simply been an issue of some of the Scoutmasters gaining the ire of the organization, as mine did before he left the organization as well. He was an outspoken asshole, but it at least felt like people were welcome to be there and involved. That was not how it felt in my last two years, under a different a scoutmaster. But then again, that's just how things went for me. I'm sure we've both seen poorly managed packs and troops die a slow death over the years.

As for the LDS troops/packs on the ground level: My best friend growing up and his family were actual LDS, so his pack (and later troop) ended up doing a lot of scouting stuff together with mine until his family moved back to Utah in 1998. I will say this: having the full faith and credit of an organized religion backing your bills made it possible for a lot under privileged scouts to engage in things they wouldn't have been able to otherwise. I still have faith in the BSA program a whole and often recommend it to people looking to get their kids interested in stuff other than their iPads. I just have to make it clear to them that there are some aspects they need to be aware of before signing up. The organization simply isn't run like it was in my day (/oldmanrant).
 
Top