|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 02 2016 13:23 xDaunt wrote:
Well, you gotta find a good realtor who is actually going to give you impartial advice, but yes, otherwise you're just going to pressured to put yourself into the meatgrinder. And yes, there are significant local components to real estate price, but prices also correlate with larger economic downturns that occur at a national level.
Good luck finding one (if you're not related/family friends). Save for unforeseen policy changes or economic meltdown you'd be better served focusing at the local level imo.
But so long as you're not using your house as an investment vehicle then it doesn't really matter. At some point in the next 20 years your house will be worth less than it is right now and at another point it will be worth more. So long as the paper loss doesn't matter to you, then it's better just to focus on the direction the neighborhood is heading.
I wouldn't let national economic factors influence a home purchase, based off of what's on the horizon, other than buying before the off-shore money comes back, that's guaranteed to spike prices.
|
On November 02 2016 12:11 oneofthem wrote:
i mean it is just such irony that hillary haters go on and on about corruption when trump is the literal embodiment of global kleptocracy migrating and infiltrating the west. especially wikileaks et al anti-government activists.
newsflash morons, how do you fight this incredibly corrosive and unjust phenomenon without international governmental institutions and laws?
The rules and laws at a nation state level are already in place in the USA.They just need to be followed and criminal charges need to be made where appropriate.
You talk about international government like the UN but when a country can just veto any action it's pointless to talk about.I mean we saw Saudi Arabia head the UN human rights council in the first half of this year - totally indefensible.The UN is a total mess.
|
What the hell's going on?
|
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices?
|
|
|
Some generally credible pollsters felt that they aren't really up to the task and they curtailed their polling activities. I'm not surprised polling is down.
|
|
|
Comments say it all, absolute desperation from the democrats.
|
Lol I almost tried to reason with Nettles about the state of the election, caught myself at the last second.
|
On November 02 2016 17:36 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Comments say it all, absolute desperation from the democrats.
m8 they literally plan(ned) to send people wearing badges that seem official to interrogate minorities entering voting locations.
They have been successfully litigated for this in the past. It's not like the good ol boy party is clean.
|
HRC
Pro:has experience and knows how to play the game.
Con: honesty and integrity, also bad judgement
Trump
Pro: has the capacity to change the status quo
Con: No experience or knowledge regarding political matters, and bad temperament.
|
On November 02 2016 20:04 biology]major wrote:
HRC
Pro:has experience and knows how to play the game.
Con: honesty and integrity, also bad judgement
Trump
Pro: has the capacity to change the status quo
Con: No experience or knowledge regarding political matters, and bad temperament.
Can you mention the fact that Trump has 0 integrity whatsoever please?
And second question: you put capacity to change the status quo as a pro. Wa can agree than things could be a shitload worse, right?
So I would change your "pro" for at least "???"
|
A pretty interesting talk by (and especially discussion with) John Kerry on the Iran deal and the situation in Syria: link.
|
On November 02 2016 14:50 Maenander wrote:
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices?
Asking the right question. Yea, isnt it mind boggling that these two horse**** candidates are contenders for the presidency of the world's no1 country? Its like we live in a parody.
|
On November 02 2016 20:28 NukeD wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 14:50 Maenander wrote:
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices? Asking the right question. Yea, isnt it mind boggling that these two horse**** candidates are contenders for the presidency of the world's no1 country? Its like we live in a parody.
No parody, just history repeating itself.
The same happened to the Roman empire what is now happening to the American empire.
These are the candidates America deserves for where it is at.
|
Zurich15365 Posts
On November 02 2016 20:51 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 20:28 NukeD wrote:On November 02 2016 14:50 Maenander wrote:
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices? Asking the right question. Yea, isnt it mind boggling that these two horse**** candidates are contenders for the presidency of the world's no1 country? Its like we live in a parody. No parody, just history repeating itself. The same happened to the Roman empire what is now happening to the American empire. These are the candidates America deserves for where it is at.
Roman empire? Elections?
|
On November 02 2016 20:51 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 20:28 NukeD wrote:On November 02 2016 14:50 Maenander wrote:
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices? Asking the right question. Yea, isnt it mind boggling that these two horse**** candidates are contenders for the presidency of the world's no1 country? Its like we live in a parody. No parody, just history repeating itself. The same happened to the Roman empire what is now happening to the American empire. These are the candidates America deserves for where it is at.
Yes. America may not get the hero it needs, but it gets the hero it deserves this election. It's like a reverse batman movie.
|
On November 02 2016 21:00 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 20:51 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On November 02 2016 20:28 NukeD wrote:On November 02 2016 14:50 Maenander wrote:
I am glad I have no part in this election, wouldn't want to vote for either option. How could it come down to two ugly choices? Asking the right question. Yea, isnt it mind boggling that these two horse**** candidates are contenders for the presidency of the world's no1 country? Its like we live in a parody. No parody, just history repeating itself. The same happened to the Roman empire what is now happening to the American empire. These are the candidates America deserves for where it is at. Roman empire? Elections?
You still taking this thread seriously?
|
|
|
Kept away for a long time from this thread an teamliquid in general, coming back for a rather simple question that was asked in the pub last weekend. Between two pints, a couple of mates raised the point that the election is rigged, ironically, considering the US is the self proclaimed "democracy spreader" of the world.
My opinion is/was, that there won't be any rigging at the voting ballots. That's just a retarded idea. But the argument that the election is rigged came from the behaviour of the DNC and ("connected") media.
Would "very one-sided media" and a party that actively denounces/undermines efforts of certain candidates make the election "rigged"? Since i took a break, roughly 1500 pages were added to this thread, if it was discussed already, my bad - friendly pointer to roughly the right point would be nice then.
Trump now seen as more honest than Clinton in new Post-ABC Tracking Poll
That's not surprising to me, honestly. Although "more trustworthy" is relative. Less than 0 trustworthiness is still 0 trustworthiness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
