|
Murgos posted:Can you elaborate? I’m not following the Hogwarts Legacy space at all. Like, I knew Rowling was pretty lovely but other than making a rich lovely person richer I didn’t know there were other more immediate issues. My understanding is that the plot of the game involves evil goblin bankers who not only have the classic "racist jewish caricature" designs with big noses and greed and whatnot, but the game also literally portrays Jewish artifacts as Goblin artifacts in like, museums and stuff. And other direct connections to antisemitic tropes. Just to make sure you know the resemblance wasn't an accident.
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 14:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Murgos posted:Can you elaborate? I’m not following the Hogwarts Legacy space at all. Like, I knew Rowling was pretty lovely but other than making a rich lovely person richer I didn’t know there were other more immediate issues. There's a goblin revolution happening during the game's time period that involves more than a few classic anti-Semitic tropes, one of which includes the abduction of wizard children to steal their magic/blood.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 14:15
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:There's a goblin revolution happening during the game's time period that involves more than a few classic anti-Semitic tropes, one of which includes the abduction of wizard children to steal their magic/blood. Oh come now, I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that *checks notes* the greedy, duplicitous banker race with long noses, who use shofars to rally their troops, would have anything in common with anti-Semitic stereotypes. PC gone mad, it is! (This was sarcasm, in case it wasn't clear)
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
Clarste posted:My understanding is that the plot of the game involves evil goblin bankers who not only have the classic "racist jewish caricature" designs with big noses and greed and whatnot, but the game also literally portrays Jewish artifacts as Goblin artifacts in like, museums and stuff. And other direct connections to antisemitic tropes. Just to make sure you know the resemblance wasn't an accident. Yeah but what about Jewey Goldstein? Ravenclaw?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 15:38
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Hell, you can see fresh examples of that happening literally today. Apparently last night the #1 most popular Crusty Nerds Who Hate Ladies and Black People internet panel show on YouTube had Gavin McInnes on as their center square guest of honor to hear his big brain thoughts on why you should blow up libraries or mow down synagogue with an AR-15 because the made April O'Neill black and thicc in the new Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie. And I guess if that wasn't enough he literally whipped out his penis and pissed all over his room live on stream seemingly unprompted for... some reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Oh come now, I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that *checks notes* the greedy, duplicitous banker race with long noses, who use shofars to rally their troops, would have anything in common with anti-Semitic stereotypes. PC gone mad, it is! I've never read or watched a HP thing but I came across this Shaun video last year and it does make seem like it's all not just a coincidence... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1iaJWSwUZs
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 16:50
|
|
|
Fox News texts may not be allowed as evidence at trial https://news.yahoo.com/foxs-pr-woes-may-not-141720747.html quote:The messages that led to some of the biggest headlines may never be introduced as evidence when the case goes to trial next month, according to lawyers and legal scholars, including several who are directly involved in the case. Fox is expected to ask a judge to exclude certain texts and emails on the grounds they are not relevant. Bullshit. The messages show a clear disparity between what FOX reporters were saying off air as opposed to on air.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 22:54
|
|
|
That's a pretty misleading media framing. Plenty of texts that generated headlines won't enter evidence but that won't matter to the outcome of the case, where Fox are pretty widely expected to lose by people with relevant expertise (though it's by no means a gimme - Fox have a fighting chance in the legal system as it stands). Tucker Carlson hating Trump and being tired of him is extremely newsworthy but it isn't relevant to the narrow question of whether Dominion was defamed by Fox coverage. Texts relevant to that question will be included and Dominion should prevail on the merits.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Fox News texts may not be allowed as evidence at trial Bolded the actual important part, this is just Fox's lawyers talking nonsense quote:The messages that led to some of the biggest headlines may never be introduced as evidence when the case goes to trial next month, according to lawyers and legal scholars, including several who are directly involved in the case.Fox is expected to ask a judge to exclude certain texts and emails on the grounds they are not relevant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
pork never goes bad posted:That's a pretty misleading media framing. Plenty of texts that generated headlines won't enter evidence but that won't matter to the outcome of the case, where Fox are pretty widely expected to lose by people with relevant expertise (though it's by no means a gimme - Fox have a fighting chance in the legal system as it stands). Tucker Carlson hating Trump and being tired of him is extremely newsworthy but it isn't relevant to the narrow question of whether Dominion was defamed by Fox coverage. Texts relevant to that question will be included and Dominion should prevail on the merits. It's extremely relevant to the questions of whether FNC lied, whether they did it knowingly, and whether the corporation bears responsibility. This is horseshit. Journalists do have a significant defense against defamation under 1A, but Fox has long made it clear the people in question aren't journalists. Even if they were, those texts show they acted in bad faith. They knew, for instance, Sidney Powell was liikely lying and said nothing on air. This case is also not about what guests said even if that's the right wing framing. This is about the statements by hosts on air and whether it was part of a corporate strategy to cynically push the lies about Dominion to preserve viewership. Guest bookings will be evidence of that, and things said by guests will probably not be so important.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
Right wing media seems to have their talking points for the recent events. "SVB was a woke bank full of liberals practicing DEI and now the government is bailing them out because they're Dem voters."
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 08:39
|
|
|
ErIog posted:It's extremely relevant to the questions of whether FNC lied, whether they did it knowingly, and whether the corporation bears responsibility. This is horseshit. Journalists do have a significant defense against defamation under 1A, but Fox has long made it clear the people in question aren't journalists. Even if they were, those texts show they acted in bad faith. They knew, for instance, Sidney Powell was liikely lying and said nothing on air. I basically entirely agree with your points here - your examples of texts are ones that are relevant. But Tucker Carlson's "I loving hate him" text about Trump isn't explicitly relevant to the question of whether Fox defamed Dominion, for example. So the media framing is misleading because it's implying that the fact that not all texts that have made headlines will enter evidence actually says something. Not every text that made a headline will enter evidence, that's true, it just doesn't matter because the case won't turn on those texts anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 09:13
|
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:Right wing media seems to have their talking points for the recent events. "SVB was a woke bank full of liberals practicing DEI and now the government is bailing them out because they're Dem voters." Not surprising. Chuds blamed the 08 crash on Obama or democrats forcing banks to loan money to black people with bad credit. The failures of capitalism get twisted up by their pretzel logic into a way to justify upholding the status quo.  "If we make it too easy for poor people to buy houses, it will crash the market! Banks aren't racist, they are just operating off the risks the loan won't be repaid!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 11:49
|
|
|
It's impressive in a way. Facts and reality be damned, they are only fulfilled when they hate other people so obviously transgender people caused a silicon valley venture capital bank to go under. No thought required. No need to engage with reality. Thing happened, thing caused by people I hate, done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 12:29
|
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:Right wing media seems to have their talking points for the recent events. "SVB was a woke bank full of liberals practicing DEI and now the government is bailing them out because they're Dem voters." One of the major depositors was Peter Thiel, known Liberal
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 14:42
|
|
|
Can someone give me a real basic rundown of what happened with SVB like I'm 5 or have no idea how banks operate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:Can someone give me a real basic rundown of what happened with SVB like I'm 5 or have no idea how banks operate? VC techbros are idiots who are all in the same group chat and panicked themselves and did a bank run. Also SVB had successfully lobbied to not be regulated. https://twitter.com/TNOQuoProQuid/status/1635053963958714369?s=20 Piell fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Mar 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:Can someone give me a real basic rundown of what happened with SVB like I'm 5 or have no idea how banks operate? SVB owned lots of low-yield bonds that they bought when interest rates were low. As interest rates increased, those bonds became less valuable, meaning they now didn't have enough assets. Peter Thiel then kicks off a bank run in their billionaire circlejerk chat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:Can someone give me a real basic rundown of what happened with SVB like I'm 5 or have no idea how banks operate? Venture capital companies forced their client companies to put all their money into SVB. SVB then put (almost) all the money into uncashable long term (30yr) government bonds that pay 1% interest instead of diversifying. VC told it's biggest clients to pull out all their cash, and SVB didn't have enough cash on hand to pay it out (see bonds bought above - no one wants them since current rates are ~5%) and everyone panicked as first people there get their money (aka the bank run). Government came in, and took over since SVB ran out of cash on hand and will work out some kind of deal so the depositers get their cash.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
So once again taxpayers are going to be on the hook for billions of dollars so these VC pissbabies get their money back, while if this happened to any of us, we'd get the FDIC $250,000 and told to gently caress off. That about right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
The net cost to taxpayers is going to be zero. The FDIC might take a haircut up front (though maybe not, the overall balance of SVB seems to be OK), but they'll get it back from fees from the banks. And they'd probably do this for any bank so as not to cause the entire banking industry to consolidate to the huge banks more than it already is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:So once again taxpayers are going to be on the hook for billions of dollars so these VC pissbabies get their money back, while if this happened to any of us, we'd get the FDIC $250,000 and told to gently caress off. From just what I've seen that's not precisely the opposite of the truth, but it's closer to that than it is to "about right." The government's pretty solid at making sure depositors get their money back in bank failures and this time is just unusual for how weird the surrounding story is. Also wondering how much "any of us" having $250,000 in the bank is. Edit: Wait, I was confusing the thread this was in. Rest of point stands. Killer robot fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Mar 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 15:31
|
|
|
“Woke” in Fox terms means “There was a black person who did not immediately denounce all other black people as violent welfare thugs” or “A women went 30 minutes without being assaulted by Roger Ailes.”
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:“Woke” in Fox terms means “There was a black person who did not immediately denounce all other black people as violent welfare thugs” or “A women went 30 minutes without being assaulted by Roger Ailes.” Hey now, it also sometimes means "someone suggested burning fossil fuels might be bad for the environment."
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Jethro posted:The net cost to taxpayers is going to be zero. The FDIC might take a haircut up front (though maybe not, the overall balance of SVB seems to be OK), but they'll get it back from fees from the banks. And they'd probably do this for any bank so as not to cause the entire banking industry to consolidate to the huge banks more than it already is. I think there is a cost but it's *maybe* minimal. The thing the government is doing to 'fix' the liquidity problem of having lots of low yield bonds when no one wants to buy them is to loan the bank the value secured by the bond. Which is a wash. Really. I borrow money from you and give you a bond. You need money so I lend you money and you give me back the bond. Sometime in the future the bond comes due and I pay myself off. So, that would be fine, except for that the way the government gets money is to borrow it with low interest loans in the form of government bonds. So, essentially the government is buying back it's old bonds and replacing them with newer higher interest bonds. Maybe? Except that supposedly this loans are only short term which would mean it does all wash out over the next year. Unless the duration gets extended. So, yeah, something like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:So once again taxpayers are going to be on the hook for billions of dollars so these VC pissbabies get their money back, while if this happened to any of us, we'd get the FDIC $250,000 and told to gently caress off. Think of what happens if the feds don't stabilize the bank and guarantee deposits. There's some good things - VC pissbabies don't get their millions. Some rich people will experience a fraction of the financial instability that their system forces countless people into. But there's also plenty of bad things - many companies can't make payroll, many employees don't get paid, some can't make rent, others can't buy food, for example. And it's not just VCs that used SVB - they had a robust small business lending and banking program, for example. So some small businesses may not be able to pay operating expenses which keep them afloat - think about the bakery that can't buy flour, for example. And SVB had a lot of nonprofit customers. These ripple effects would cause widespread harm. And taking it one step further, bank runs that are not managed well can cause contagion in the banking system and cause either a recession like 08 or even widespread collapse of banking. That'd be real bad for everyone! Frankly, while I think it's good that taxpayers won't be on the hook very much, I'd certainly be happy with some of my tax payments going to prevent this scale of unnecessary suffering until we can actually build a better system. Eta I got real happy with "for example" here didn't I?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
This is what conservatives believe. This idiot is so popular because he's got a paw on the pulse of right wing political beliefs. https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1635314628191297536?t=5NLLclIcuksmEa8Bm0ECXA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
LA and NYC don't even have that bad crime compared to all kinds of other places. Like, the 25 states that voted for Trump have higher murder rates than the 25 states that voted for Biden, have had them for over 20 years, and over that time period it's gone from about 10% more to 40% more murders in red states. Even when you pull out cities in the red states and not the blue, they've got like 10% more murders over the twenty year period. Just totally disconnected from reality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
but but but all my tv and radio shows keep telling me the nyc and la and chicago are bad
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
huh listening to afternoon NPR and apparently two fundie "documentary" markers have a a save the children doc. Sextortion https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15080212/ billions of children are trafficked. oh also one of their previous docs, Renegade is about some crazy guy that does the whole jewish lizards thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Just the same old satanic panic bullshit, reskinned yet again. You could probably draw a straight line from Salem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
It's a bailout that's most likely not going to cost the government money because at the end of the day it's loans that are covered by banks pledging government treasuries as collateral. Just more galling special treatment for the rich, if I keep my retirement in treasury bonds and their value crashes right when I need to get some cash is the government going to step in with a friendly loan so I don't have to take a huge haircut selling bonds into a bear market, of course not. I'd just be eating cat food to teach me a lesson about personal responsibility. Just like TARP, technically the government made money off the program by the end of it, but it wasn't for everybody, it was just a lifeline to Wall Street while ordinary people lost their homes even though a government rescue package for them to refinance ARMs to low fixed-rate mortgages could well have been profitable
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:From what I've seen, it seems pretty simple compared to regular finance nonsense. I've read several long articles, seen a few documentaries and watched a few dramas that get into the cause of the 2008 crash and I still don't loving understand it. But the common refrain I hear in social settings is always "the government forced banks to give loans to people that couldn't afford it" and it's always from some CHUD type so I have my doubts that it's that simple. Along similar lines, these two bank failures are apparently totally because of the government which naturally means it was Biden's fault but I didn't listen long enough to get details. Hannity is going to have a bunch of "economists" on his show tonight that will likely delve into all the details about democrats caused this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
The current GOP talking point is that 'woke banks' are the problem now In fact, apparently DeSantis said that 'woke investing' caused this collapse but of course did not give any details
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I've read several long articles, seen a few documentaries and watched a few dramas that get into the cause of the 2008 crash and I still don't loving understand it. Here's a more detailed but still pretty understandable explanation of SVB situation. Seems roughly in line with what I posted earlier: https://archive.is/CqpVU Trump bragged about repealing the specific regulation that would've prevented this, but of course it's the woke Biden's fault.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
I would suggest that any business capable of going broke from wokeness, probably wasn’t doing too great to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 01:31
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I've read several long articles, seen a few documentaries and watched a few dramas that get into the cause of the 2008 crash and I still don't loving understand it. the banks made profits off of bundling up mortgages and selling them as mortgage backed securities. when the demand for mbs outstripped the supply of credit worthy home buyers, the banks started expanding who they would give a home loan, eventually reaching the point where they were giving loans to anyone who could mostly fill out an application. the widespread practice of coaching applicants or doctoring applications to clear the already rock bottom requirements is well documented and was done to make sure that the mbs pipeline and its lucrative fees didn't dry up the folks making and bundling the mortgages knew that as long as they could clear the mortgages off their books it didn't matter whether the loans were sound because they made their profit up front. it was assumed that a)they would be able to wind up operations and clear their books of mortgages waiting to be packaged before the market caught on (some did, some didn't), and b)the government would be forced to step in to backstop losses (the so called moral hazard which pretty much was spot on) one question to ask is, if pressure to make the bad loans came from the government and not the banks, why were the independent rating agencies willing to sign off on all the mbs as investment grade bonds if the banks were being forced to make loans they didn't want to?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 01:44
|
|
|
pork never goes bad posted:LA and NYC don't even have that bad crime compared to all kinds of other places. Someone on Twitter once pointed out that Jacksonville has a higher murder rate than NYC. The galaxy brain right wing response was to say that looking at murders per population rate is misleading, you should actually look at the murders per square foot, where Jacksonville is much lower than NYC, therefore proving Jacksonville is better and safer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 03:04
|
|
|
Mechanical Ape posted:I would suggest that any business capable of going broke from wokeness, probably wasn’t doing too great to begin with. see ever time there's a wage increase, and Fox finds a "small biz" shitlord to say "they're closing" note theyre often in the process of already closing or have already closed months or years ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:Someone on Twitter once pointed out that Jacksonville has a higher murder rate than NYC. Ah yes, the Oklahoma City is actually a big city logic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2023 03:48
|
|