|
Trump tweets amateur campaign aid narrated by suave, interstellar racist. This election is loving magical.
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
So it turns out Matt Taibbi is a hypocritical rear end in a top hat, please contain your surprise.Pando posted:
https://pando.com/2016/04/04/matt-taibbi-crusader-against-income-inequality-was-paid-240k-first-look-media-publishing-zero-stories/
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Good for him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
I am glad that Matt Taibbi took the rich rear end in a top hat's money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Mulva posted:So it turns out Matt Taibbi is a hypocritical rear end in a top hat, please contain your surprise. I'm not like, mad at Taibbi or anything about this, because I'm sure he's probably signed some sort of NDA about his time there, but that last line is loving gold.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Trump tweets amateur campaign aid narrated by suave, interstellar racist. This election is loving magical. Spotted a David Lynch parody Bernie ad. Sometimes I love you crazy fucks south of the border... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Radbot posted:A great way to spot a lovely journalistic outfit is if they currently, or ever have, had Matt Yglesias on staff Different news organizations have different editorial standards and that's OK. Edit: poo poo Joementum got there first. Literally fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Mulva posted:So it turns out Matt Taibbi is a hypocritical rear end in a top hat, please contain your surprise. Sooooo we're supposed to be mad that Taibbi basically scammed Pierre Omidyar out of a hot $230k and didn't take a poo poo all over him after?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Trump tweets amateur campaign aid narrated by suave, interstellar racist. This election is loving magical. That is a joke ad. The Drumpf retweeted a parody ad about his campaign. And I'm not joking, how is the slide at 0:35 part of a serious ad? The Slide posted:"Donald Trump is simply awe-inspiring" Fake edit: Haha, word filter keeps being silly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Like anyone here wouldn't fleece one of those morons for a quarter mil if they thought they had half a chance
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Like anyone here wouldn't fleece one of those morons for a quarter mil if they thought they had half a chance Like politicians taking money to give speeches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
Mulva posted:So it turns out Matt Taibbi is a hypocritical rear end in a top hat, please contain your surprise. Am I missing the part when he is revealed to be a "hypocritical rear end in a top hat"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I'm not like, mad at Taibbi or anything about this, because I'm sure he's probably signed some sort of NDA about his time there, but that last line is loving gold. In fairness to Matt Taibbi, $230k is only about half of what you'd need to be in the top 1%
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
Trevor Hale posted:Like politicians taking money to give speeches. Let me sum up almost every speech I've heard at work from some executive or elected official. Innovation good, hard work good. Work harder, Innovate more. The only one I heard a different one was when we had a long time CEO who was in his last ~30 days and was giving a speech to a small group. He went completely off script and started talking about his time as a roadie for the Grateful Dead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:In fairness to Matt Taibbi, $230k is only about half of what you'd need to be in the top 1% Not to mention that it doesn't matter how much money you make, you can be against income inequality because it's bad for the country and for the economy. I'm a socialist, but it's not like I wouldn't take a do-nothing cushy job if it was offered. You'd be a fool not to, regardless of your politics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
That Matt Tabbi piece reads more like a bitter editorial director who's mad he didn't get that fat check to be honest and Tabbi did. He's literally using the "nothing gets past this guy!" logic from that Occupy comic. "If Matt Tabbi is so against income inequality why does he have money?!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Star Man posted:The anti-vax crowd is in both parties. If anything, I'd say more Republicans are in it because the people advocating are usually white and affluent. Trump said he knew a little kid who got autism from vaccines
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Trump said he knew a little kid who got autism from vaccines And that little kid was.....
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Radbot posted:That's probably worse, IMO. Imagine if Republicans were self-aware enough to try swinging the "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" idiots that are a natural Republican constituency - the younger folks are probably smart enough to pull that off. being "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" doesn't make sense to me because it seems like economics and social issues are entangled to the point where you can't make a statement about one without making implications about the other.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Kanine posted:being "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" doesn't make sense to me because it seems like economics and social issues are entangled to the point where you can't make a statement about one without making implications about the other. This would be true, but people don't really get this argument and actively chafe when presented with this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Pando has a particularly strong dislike for Omidyar, he's the focus of roughly half their political reporting. I'm really disappointed that they didn't get Ames to write that piece.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Kanine posted:being "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" doesn't make sense to me because it seems like economics and social issues are entangled to the point where you can't make a statement about one without making implications about the other. It's easy to overestimate the amount of people who are even aware of economics as a whole, let alone from a national policy perspective. Just about everyone assumes they understand how money works because they use it on a household or business level every day. The more self-aware start picking up on basic elements of fairness/unfairness if they have empathy for those worse off than them, but even then whatever grand theory they mentally piece together usually doesn't involve stances on fiscal policy that go so far as to actually go against the daily grain of "don't spend too much." EDIT: Since economics lessons aren't exactly correlated with fiscal liberalism/welfare states, it's also probably just history and culture compounding on themselves, like most status quo policies. When it comes to money it's every temporarily embarrassed millionaire for themselves in the US. Combed Thunderclap fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:In fairness to Matt Taibbi, $230k is only about half of what you'd need to be in the top 1% well he did only work for half a year so that probably still counts as 1% pay
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:55
|
|
Kanine posted:being "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" doesn't make sense to me because it seems like economics and social issues are entangled to the point where you can't make a statement about one without making implications about the other. I think what most people really mean here is "I support gay marriage, pro-choice, etc. up until the moment it might inconvenience me in any way" even if they don't think they mean it in that way.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
Star Man posted:The anti-vax crowd is in both parties. If anything, I'd say more Republicans are in it because the people advocating are usually white and affluent. Can't post about gop anti vaxx bullshit without mentioning faith healing where you pray away your kid's pneumonia. It works because dead kids don't have pneumonia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:00
|
|
|
E: /\ can't pass up a mention of anti-vaxers without calling out their copilots who think Norman Borlaug was basically Hitler.Zerilan posted:I think what most people really mean here is "I support gay marriage, pro-choice, etc. up until the moment it might inconvenience me in any way" even if they don't think they mean it in that way. No it basically means they're racist garbage because "fiscally conservative" has been code for perpetuating the socioeconomic marginalization of minorities for like 35 years now. You can be racist as hell and want gays to get married, take Lindsey Graham for example. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is code for "I don't care enough about politics to make a decision."
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:05
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is code for "I don't care We can probably stop the post right there. Seriously, FC/SL is basically "meh whatever as long as we can afford it" which is... probably not a great political stance!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Kanine posted:being "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" doesn't make sense to me because it seems like economics and social issues are entangled to the point where you can't make a statement about one without making implications about the other. Race is the exception when being socially liberal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:E: /\ can't pass up a mention of anti-vaxers without calling out their copilots who think Norman Borlaug was basically Hitler. Why is the dwarf wheat guy Hitler? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
Mulva posted:So it turns out Matt Taibbi is a hypocritical rear end in a top hat, please contain your surprise. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/i-do-not-think-that-word-means-what-you-think-it-means-hypocrisy-edition/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/george-washington-was-a-hypocrite/
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
Heard a guy ranting about Trump today to a group of people at my local bar today. Things like "our country should be run like a business," "he's a successful business man," and "he's not a politician!" really do seem to motivate people to want to vote for Trump. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
BUSH 2112 posted:Not to mention that it doesn't matter how much money you make, you can be against income inequality because it's bad for the country and for the economy. I'm a socialist, but it's not like I wouldn't take a do-nothing cushy job if it was offered. You'd be a fool not to, regardless of your politics. Yeah this. I'm literally first against the wall material based on my income (both from my job and inheritance) yet I'm still a raging socialist because I can actually recognize that not everyone was born with the massive amount of advantages I've had and to do nothing while those advantages for the rich and their families are so far in their favor is morally repugnant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Let's copy the Tories! in which Paul Ryan suggests that the GOP, well, stops being the GOP in order to be electable again. This makes me nostalgic for the old Republican Rebuilding threads 3-4 years ago.quote:Scorched earth tactics. Pandering to people’s worst fears. Ugly and alienating rhetoric. Extreme positions that offend vast swaths of the electorate. Yes folks, this has been the apparent political strategy of the GOP over the past eight years. Donald Trump? If the Republicans are in crisis, he’s not the cause. He’s the symptom.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Income statement. Although it eventually gets to the balance sheet through retained earnings. quote:But I certainly wouldn't call it negligible. You can calculate it using pretty simple algebra. Assuming you're a corporation paying at the 35% rate, every extra dollar you are forced to spend in deductible expenses is going to reduce your net income after taxes by 65 cents. For some companies, that can amount to a lot of money. This isn't really true though. As revenue increases, the payroll expense remains fixed and any increase in profit is taxed at a constant rate (ignoring tax brackets for now). Which means that as long as a firms revenue covers the increased payroll expense the difference in net income will remain a fixed dollar amount. For example using a federal minimum wage of $7.25. If a firm has income of $100,000 and it's only expense is an employee payroll of $16,256 (7.25* 40 hours/week*52 weeks + 7.8% payroll tax) and is charged an income tax of 35% after deductions their net income is $54,433. If you raise minimum wage to $15/hour the same firms net income is $43,138, for a difference of roughly $11K. If you increase this hypothetical firms revenue to $1 million the net income difference between the two payrolls doesn't change, but remains constant at $11K. Simplex fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
Huh, they really don't understand their voters if that's the plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Heard a guy ranting about Trump today to a group of people at my local bar today. Things like "our country should be run like a business," "he's a successful business man," and "he's not a politician!" really do seem to motivate people to want to vote for Trump. If you don't know any better, if you don't have a particularly deep understanding of politics, those phrases really do seem like the kinds of things that one might otherwise think are good traits to have in a national leader. And this isn't some sort of "dumb uninformed voters" kinda thing - I acknowledge that lots of people don't have the opportunity or the cultural experience to have these sorts of platitudes dispelled.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is code for "I don't care enough about politics to make a decision." Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is the vanity position for people who don't want to be called bigots and don't understand that "fiscally conservative" doesn't mean "fiscally responsible."
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is the vanity position for people who don't want to be called bigots and don't understand that "fiscally conservative" doesn't mean "fiscally responsible."
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
Cactus posted:Let's copy the Tories! in which Paul Ryan suggests that the GOP, well, stops being the GOP in order to be electable again. This makes me nostalgic for the old Republican Rebuilding threads 3-4 years ago. Well that was...incoherent quote:On top of all that, political commentators described the Conservatives as “the stupid party” for relying on simplistic, shop-worn ideological bromides, and “the economics party” for prioritizing tax cuts, deregulation and fiscal calculation over all else. "People don't like Republicans because our solution to everything is cutting taxes for the rich. We need to be the champions of the family and the working class and really address the poverty in our country with human, organic solutions. For example, instead of helping the poor with soulless dependency-causing welfare, we could cut taxes on the rich. Instead of dull mechanical factory schooling, we could cut taxes on the rich."
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 08:48
|
|
