|
cr0y posted:With Trump it could be literally anything including him not being involved in anyway whatsoever. The options are: Zero_Grade fucked around with this message at 20:08 on May 13, 2023 |
#
?
May 13, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
cr0y posted:With Trump it could be literally anything including him not being involved in anyway whatsoever. The options are: There are still russian mobster types active with ties to the motherland sure but not necessarily Putin, so it could be sanctions or just unrelated criminality or Trump related criminality or combo. Sister in law’s ex got busted right before Covid for running a gang related puppy mill for fighting dogs. Saturday morning cartoon villain poo poo. Nice enough dudes if you’re not a cop/rival tho
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
Barrel Cactaur posted:Selling existing debt in that framing still causes inflation, debt financing is inflationary. Also, increasing the amount of publicly circulating US debt in this manner at the same time as an unusual financial maneuver is going to hurt US bond prices. Much of this debt was acquired at lower interest rates, so your going to have to sell it at a discount from its face value to account for the difference from market rate, locking in even MORE inflation of the effective supply of money. Its a bad idea, and worse magic thinking. I don't think you quite understand the premium bond idea. The bond would still be auctioned off at the current interest rates but the FACE value of the bond would be lower. "The premium-bond gimmick is: Treasury sells you one one-year $100 bond today, with an interest rate of 109%. In a year you get back $209: the $100 face amount of the bond, plus 109% interest. That bond has a face amount of $100, but it is clearly worth $200 today: It is economically the same as the two 4.5% bonds from the previous paragraph. So you’d be willing to pay Treasury $200 for it: the $100 face amount, plus $100 of “premium” to make the yield work out. And Treasury would be willing to sell it to you for $200: It sells you this $100 bond for $200. Treasury gets $200 of cash. But technically this bond is only $100 of “debt,” of face amount, so it only increases the debt by $100." The Treasury is constantly issuing bonds so these would just be offered in their upcoming auctions in place of the regular bond. koolkal fucked around with this message at 20:24 on May 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
Literally just halving the face value of bonds but charging the same price for them. It's brilliant in its simplicity. Next they should write a law that says that the national debt must always be measured per capita.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
Barrel Cactaur posted:BTW the true killer for hydrogen is infrastructure.  I wouldn't recommend it beyond the reasons listed here because the stations break down all the loving time Of the five pumps in three locations here in Sacramento only one has worked at all in the past two months, with no sign of life from the other ones (one said they were going to open yesterday and nope). That one working pump? It's a mandatory ten minute wait between fillups. There were six cars in line as of half past midnight, which means at least two hours to fill up. I spent three hours last week, and four hours one time last year. It's often easier to drive the 70 miles each way to Concord to fill up. At least the lease was cheap, I got a $4,500 rebate, fuel is free and the car is nice v v
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:I drive a Hyundai Nexo, the "other" hydrogen vehicle That's another problem with Hydrogen, there is no infrastructure for it and transporting it is not easy.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 21:30
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:I drive a Hyundai Nexo, the "other" hydrogen vehicle What’s more, 98% of that hydrogen is from fracked natural gas but even if they evolved to using 100% electrolysis based hydrogen it would still be less efficient than a BEV and home charging would be an expensive piece of gear. FYI I’m on a San Diego to Vegas trip to visit family with my EV and the charging infrastructure has vastly improved since I last did this two years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Literally just halving the face value of bonds but charging the same price for them. It's brilliant in its simplicity. But only in years with a Democrat as President. When it's a Republican, debt must be measured against the amount of water in the ocean.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 23:20
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:What’s more, 98% of that hydrogen is from fracked natural gas but even if they evolved to using 100% electrolysis based hydrogen it would still be less efficient than a BEV and home charging would be an expensive piece of gear. Well aware. Unfortunately I live in an apartment so an EV is out of the question at this time. Which is another problem that needs solving.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 23:47
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:Well aware. Unfortunately I live in an apartment so an EV is out of the question at this time. Which is another problem that needs solving. I only have 110v outlet but I manage ok (I’m renting a duplex with a mis-wired dryer outlet) Where I live, if I couldn’t charge at home it wouldn’t be an issue. Coffee shop 3 miles away has free fast chargers.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 00:13
|
|
|
Tayter Swift posted:Well aware. Unfortunately I live in an apartment so an EV is out of the question at this time. Which is another problem that needs solving. My apartment building has chargers in the garage.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 02:00
|
|
|
Personally, I agree that attacking trump or other republicans for their physical characteristics is not only morally wrong, but can potentially drive away potential democrat voters. For example remember those statues some artist made of trump with a comically small penis, which was an obvious jab at him. As a man with a clinical micropenis, this was only another reminder of my disability and while I could never vote for a republican, it caused me a level of mental anguish that I could see a more centrist voter finding to be a bridge too far. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 03:56
|
|
|
I barely resist most bodyshaming of trump but I absolutely can't let go of his eternal desperate clinging to look like a villain finance dude from an 80s movie and how he will never ever ever ever stop chasing that dragon even as his mind slips and it gets harder to put spraytan on that pig Like the application of his routine will get shudder and more inconsistent and I hope we get to some kind of Giuliani's melting hair moment
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 04:15
|
|
|
Short fingered vulgarian will never not be funny. Mostly because it pisses him off.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 04:34
|
|
|
Who was it that said his eyes look like smaller versions of his mouth? That is probably the best dig at his appearance anyone ever came up with. It's just perfect. Part of me wants to add something about his mouth and therefore also his eyes looking like a cat anus, but that feels like putting a hat on a hat.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 05:42
|
|
|
I also feel like it's part of the problem with those deranged rear end trump threads that liberals get more obsessed with trump than his own followers are and at the expense of literally everything else. Trump is a symptom of the problem, he is not the source and getting rid of him will not fix it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 06:05
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I also feel like it's part of the problem with those deranged rear end trump threads that liberals get more obsessed with trump than his own followers are and at the expense of literally everything else. Can you expand on this with specific examples? TBH, I barely knew Trump had some town hall with CNN. And after I found out, I saw a headline with Anderson Cooper essentially saying “please don’t watch this”* *I think the literal wording was closer to “I don’t blame you if you don’t watch this” Kalit fucked around with this message at 06:25 on May 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 06:22
|
|
|
I'm still loving shocked that people were watching Trump's speeches in this very forum. And then complaining about their mental health issues. Don't need to dunk your head in the sewer to confirm it still tastes like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 06:26
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I'm still loving shocked that people were watching Trump's speeches in this very forum. And then complaining about their mental health issues. Don't need to dunk your head in the sewer to confirm it still tastes like poo poo. So…because there were some people in D&D watching Trump’s speeches, you’re making the claim that Ghost Leviathan posted:liberals get more obsessed with trump than his own followers are ???? Sounds like you’re doing some heavy projecting, TBH…
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 06:30
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:As a man with a clinical micropenis, More like pencildick amirite folks Staluigi posted:I barely resist most bodyshaming of trump but I absolutely can't let go of his eternal desperate clinging to look like a villain finance dude from an 80s movie Reminder that this is at least in part because 80s finance villains were based on him
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 10:09
|
|
|
Honestly, the only thing physical appearance related to Trump that is worthy of actual mockery, discussion, or contemplation is his hair. It's the very embodiment of both being obsessed with how others see you, and refusing to care how others see you. It's very existence approaches becoming a koan. Edit: It is hilarious that he still sends pictures with his normal size hands circled in sharpie to the guy who offhandedly called him a short fingered vulgarian though.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 10:28
|
|
|
"Not making fun of someone for their apperance" isn't decorum-poisoning for liberals. It's making sure your *friends* don't hear you call someone a fat blob, and your fat friend's monkey brain hear that you think that *they* are gross.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 11:42
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Personally, I agree that attacking trump or other republicans for their physical characteristics is not only morally wrong, but can potentially drive away potential democrat voters. For example remember those statues some artist made of trump with a comically small penis, which was an obvious jab at him. As a man with a clinical micropenis, this was only another reminder of my disability and while I could never vote for a republican, it caused me a level of mental anguish that I could see a more centrist voter finding to be a bridge too far. Typical leftist, trying to get more than his naturally endowed to. But more seriously this is as good a time as any to remind people that negative attacks don't bring people to your cause, they just suppress the vote for the other person.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 12:05
|
|
|
pencilhands posted:Personally, I agree that attacking trump or other republicans for their physical characteristics is not only morally wrong, but can potentially drive away potential democrat voters. For example remember those statues some artist made of trump with a comically small penis, which was an obvious jab at him. As a man with a clinical micropenis, this was only another reminder of my disability and while I could never vote for a republican, it caused me a level of mental anguish that I could see a more centrist voter finding to be a bridge too far. Okay and if you were say, famous for making fun of people for their small dicks on social media, live and in nearly other context that one can imagine? Or IDK shaming women for their cavernous vaginas? Twincityhacker posted:"Not making fun of someone for their apperance" isn't decorum-poisoning for liberals. I mean personally, my fat friends would totally rip on some morbidly obese guy attacking people for their physical features... It's not: "I disagree with you politically." "You fat gently caress!" It's: "Look at how ugly that bitch is!" "Uh, have you taken a look at the mirror yourself, you fat gently caress?" Also, Trump is a narcissist who clearly is obsessed with his image. His piece of poo poo supporters pretend he is the very image of a manly man and consistently attack his foes for their appearance. Exploit any weakness. If a Trump supporter rips on Biden for his speech and I point out that Trump sounds like a deranged lunatic with dementia who learned English from nothing but lovely 90's commercials, am I attacking people with mental issues, alzheimer's sufferers and people who speak English as a foreign language?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 12:09
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Honestly, the only thing physical appearance related to Trump that is worthy of actual mockery, discussion, or contemplation is his hair. Can we mock the fact he is orange?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 12:51
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Can we mock the fact he is orange? Please think of them.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 13:05
|
|
|
At this point it's scarier and almost plausible if that ain't spray tan anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
My takeaway here is that hurling racial epithets at Clarence Thomas is actually an acceptable and effective way to call out his hypocrisy on affirmative action. Imagine that moment of clarity when someone reads the n-word, mentally connects the dots, and switches their registration from independent to democratic.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 13:25
|
|
|
cr0y posted:FBI Raids Russian-Owned Condo in FL Trump Towers Would have thought sanctions would be a CBP dog and pony show, FBI is mostly geared for organized crime and counter intelligence .
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 14:12
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Can we mock the fact he is orange? It's spray tan, so I don't think it's much different than mocking his intentionally ill fitting suits. It's less a physical appearance thing and more part of his extremely weird aesthetic sense, like every picture of his personal home decor. TheDisreputableDog posted:My takeaway here is that hurling racial epithets at Clarence Thomas is actually an acceptable and effective way to call out his hypocrisy on affirmative action. Imagine that moment of clarity when someone reads the n-word, mentally connects the dots, and switches their registration from independent to democratic. Weird analogical jump aside, nobody here is trying to convince people to change their views on Trump by through transitive negging. Nobody has ever tried to change someone's vote with the argument, "But he has such tiny hands!". It's obviously even less effective of a persuasive argument than "Have you considered that your preferred candidate is a shithead?"
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 14:20
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Weird analogical jump aside, nobody here is trying to convince people to change their views on Trump by through transitive negging. Nobody has ever tried to change someone's vote with the argument, "But he has such tiny hands!". It's obviously even less effective of a persuasive argument than "Have you considered that your preferred candidate is a shithead?" The best way to argue against Trump is to argue impact and again its not for true believers, its for everyone else in the crowd. When you can tie people's choices to impact, it helps a lot in changing minds. Calling someone a racist, puts someone on the defensive because it attacks them, showing a person how their choice effects a person of color depersonalizes it. I guess also remember that a certain group (re: fascists) take any thing as a victory. Are you mad? I made the lib mad. Are you arguing my incoherent nonsense? Good, I am wasting your time and legitimizing my argument. Making fun of my appearance? Wow, so much for the tolerant left.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 14:29
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:My takeaway here is that hurling racial epithets at Clarence Thomas is actually an acceptable and effective way to call out his hypocrisy on affirmative action. Imagine that moment of clarity when someone reads the n-word, mentally connects the dots, and switches their registration from independent to democratic. Is Clarence Thomas known for hurling racial epithets at other black people? If not, you've simply made a strawman to attack because you are unable to address the actual argument. Again, unless you are dealing with someone who is terminally West Wing,  hasn't earned you a single vote. Where were all those independents in 2016? Why didn't Biden, who literally insulted people in the crowd when he got antsy at someone, lose the election?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Is Clarence Thomas known for hurling racial epithets at other black people? If not, you've simply made a strawman to attack because you are unable to address the actual argument. Neither have insults earned any votes. It’s purely for making people who already agree with you feel good. Stop pretending it’s anything that will convince the non-existent fence sitters.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Neither have insults earned any votes. It’s purely for making people who already agree with you feel good. Stop pretending it’s anything that will convince the non-existent fence sitters. Insults are a part of radicalizing your constituencies and driving them by hate and fear, and always have been. I'm not the one making it all about insults, the people who pretend there are independents who make their voting decisions based on how nice the candidates are. Well a person, really, I think others were morally opposed without regard to political effectiveness.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Is Clarence Thomas known for hurling racial epithets at other black people? If not, you've simply made a strawman to attack because you are unable to address the actual argument. All your previous arguments line up to support it. Exploiting any advantage, making it painful and difficult to be a Republican, winning by stoking fear and hatred. Why wouldn’t this qualify? quote:Again, unless you are dealing with someone who is terminally West Wing, They considered the opponent less trustworthy than Trump, and rolled the electoral dice. You’ll note that those same people helped deal Republicans historic losses in 2018, 2020, and massively underperform in 2022. Decorum helped.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:All your previous arguments line up to support it. Exploiting any advantage, making it painful and difficult to be a Republican, winning by stoking fear and hatred. Why wouldn’t this qualify? Because it's not attacking him for hypocrisy? There's already a term for what Clarence Thomas is, and it's "Uncle Tom". He doesn't consider being a black person a negative thing to my knowledge nor has he hurled racial epithets at them. You just went for the most egregious misrepresentation of the argument because again, you can't answer the actual one. quote:They considered the opponent less trustworthy than Trump, and rolled the electoral dice. You’ll note that those same people helped deal Republicans historic losses in 2018, 2020, and massively underperform in 2022. Decorum helped. Do you have any actual data for this and for decorum motivating their vote? "Trustworthiness" is not a synonym for "decorum" and Hillary had mountains more of the latter than Trump did.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
attacking people with their appearance makes you look like an rear end in a top hat whether it's a useful tactic or not, you still look like an rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:attacking people with their appearance makes you look like an rear end in a top hat Well, I personally have no problem being an rear end in a top hat to assholes.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Well, I personally have no problem being an rear end in a top hat to assholes. This stuff also accomplishes nothing. "Decorum" wrt politics has more to do with stuff like Diane Feinstein praising Lindsey Graham during Kavanaugh's appointment, not the fact that she doesn't say "Lindsey Graham is gay lol." cat botherer fucked around with this message at 17:00 on May 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Because it's not attacking him for hypocrisy? There's already a term for what Clarence Thomas is, and it's "Uncle Tom". He doesn't consider being a black person a negative thing to my knowledge nor has he hurled racial epithets at them. You just went for the most egregious misrepresentation of the argument because again, you can't answer the actual one. Yeah I'm pretty sure it's just racist when you call him that
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 17:06
|
|
