|
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 February 17 2017 11:25 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 11:21 IgnE wrote:On February 17 2017 11:16 oneofthem wrote:On February 17 2017 11:05 IgnE wrote:On February 17 2017 10:57 oneofthem wrote:On February 17 2017 10:54 IgnE wrote:shit they did a study on it? they are really cues into the REAL problems now and can lead us into a world where accumulation continued unabated. i dont know what you dont get about this, but current levels of inequality, worldwide, that are continuing to get worse are now a major barrier to capital accumulation. one would EXPECT the davos-type think tanks to be looking into their overdetermined and well formulated "problem". its mainstream now buddy it is not motivated by a desire to protect capital. this is deeply delusional. rather, humans are far more complex creatures than vulgar marxism can accommodate please, it only looks delusional to you because you think in conspiracy theories. see all your ridiculous jibes at the "left" and at "snowden" despite claiming to think in an analytic manner about how flows of material, human, and cultural resources shape outcomes. this isn't "vulgar" marxism. clinton's project fails with zero or negative growth. this is a fact. stop pretending it's delusion. you obviously dont know what motivates center left economists. very embarrassing. ive previously linked internal discussions of wceg on policy advocacy in inequality. you can see for yourself what the motivation is. as i said, your own rigid views of the world leads you to conspiratorial conclusions. im just pointing this out, doing a bit of analysis on how leftists go from a certain ideological framework about the world to ascribing evil motivations to moderates. it is all in your head buddy. i know perfectly what well motivates them, and it doesn't matter. motivations don't matter in any of my propositions. it has nothing to do with "evil actors." you are the one actually who continually feels the need to paint me as the deviant and reinscribe your viewpoint as the only legitimate one: "look at these nice people who care about really helping the poor" ill just say that im not accusing you, as in the left, of conspiracy. im accusing you of being dumb. it is understandable though
i dont think you are "accusing the left of conspiracy", i think that you are projecting a conspiracist mindset onto the "left" and then attributing certain criticisms as rooted in some ridiculous conspiracy. i assume that was just a solecism on your part but i thought it best to make that clear.
its totally understandable. a lot of people use conspiracy to reorient themselves in the face of the bewildering complexity of late capitalist world systems. your reaction to the "postmodern sublime" experience is apparently to work only within a carefully circumscribed liberal model and call anyone who objects to the carefully curated cultural inventory that structures your politcoeconomic grammar dumb
On February 17 2017 12:43 oneofthem wrote:
you dont believe in the possibility of good institutions. should just kill yourself then because the commie revolution will never come
i thought you were gloomy all the time
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it is very disappointing to see this bullshit from you. lay off the english department pipes.
everything ive said about how leftists think is generalizable to ideological thinking. you are just mad for whatever reason.
but sure, i am rather gloomy because leftists like you are so hilariously counterproductive and while i see a path forward it jsnt going to happen
|
On February 17 2017 06:32 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 06:30 Doodsmack wrote:On February 17 2017 06:24 biology]major wrote:On February 17 2017 06:16 Plansix wrote:On February 17 2017 06:07 biology]major wrote:On February 17 2017 06:00 farvacola wrote:Tsk tsk, per xDaunt's words, Fox News is your enemy Plansix, you're supposed to vehemently oppose literally everything associated with them or else...well it's not entirely clear why you have to treat everything as black and white under xDaunt's handy rule of contemporary US political cooperation, only that you give no quarter. How this relates with to conservatives turning into snowflakes when called racists is beyond me, but consistency is clearly not important anymore  your passive aggressive and indirect comments usually just undermine whatever point it is you are trying to make. Xdaunt claims to be well informed, but openly admits to not reading or caring about news he declared as from the left/biased. They are the enemy, so they can be disregarded. But then reads the rag that used to be run by Bannon and trusts them. There is a fixation on the negative stories regardless of what outlet you follow. An outlet that does positive and negative coverage of Trump, I'll call that balanced and worth consuming. There is some good in there, but the hysteria is caused by an unending fixation on the negative. Never read a breitbart article in my life so I'm not sure what that's about. Honestly, the only inquisitive TV journalist I've seen who isn't terribly biased is Cooper on Fake News Network TM. Regarding the Russia thing, it's stupid because we are put in a position where we have leaks that have damning implications, but then have no access to any other follow up information. What are we supposed to do with this information lol? I'm just going to listen to what mattis says, he seems like a independent agent in Trump's admin and so far he has been calling out Russia. A few pages ago you were agreeing that the stuff on Russia is damning, so if you're only changing your mind because Trump attacked the media today, that's a mistake. It has damning implications, but I don't know how to follow it up. I wish there was an investigation, but the republicans are too spineless. What are we to do? Draw conclusions of collusion?
Phone your congressman? Okay. Zlefin already said that. Basically this:
On February 17 2017 06:39 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 06:32 biology]major wrote:On February 17 2017 06:30 Doodsmack wrote:On February 17 2017 06:24 biology]major wrote:On February 17 2017 06:16 Plansix wrote:On February 17 2017 06:07 biology]major wrote:On February 17 2017 06:00 farvacola wrote:Tsk tsk, per xDaunt's words, Fox News is your enemy Plansix, you're supposed to vehemently oppose literally everything associated with them or else...well it's not entirely clear why you have to treat everything as black and white under xDaunt's handy rule of contemporary US political cooperation, only that you give no quarter. How this relates with to conservatives turning into snowflakes when called racists is beyond me, but consistency is clearly not important anymore your passive aggressive and indirect comments usually just undermine whatever point it is you are trying to make. Xdaunt claims to be well informed, but openly admits to not reading or caring about news he declared as from the left/biased. They are the enemy, so they can be disregarded. But then reads the rag that used to be run by Bannon and trusts them. There is a fixation on the negative stories regardless of what outlet you follow. An outlet that does positive and negative coverage of Trump, I'll call that balanced and worth consuming. There is some good in there, but the hysteria is caused by an unending fixation on the negative. Never read a breitbart article in my life so I'm not sure what that's about. Honestly, the only inquisitive TV journalist I've seen who isn't terribly biased is Cooper on Fake News Network TM. Regarding the Russia thing, it's stupid because we are put in a position where we have leaks that have damning implications, but then have no access to any other follow up information. What are we supposed to do with this information lol? I'm just going to listen to what mattis says, he seems like a independent agent in Trump's admin and so far he has been calling out Russia. A few pages ago you were agreeing that the stuff on Russia is damning, so if you're only changing your mind because Trump attacked the media today, that's a mistake. It has damning implications, but I don't know how to follow it up. I wish there was an investigation, but the republicans are too spineless. What are we to do? Draw conclusions of collusion? what to do is to contact your senators/representatives in congress, and demand investigations or you'll vote against them.
|
when even fox has had enough of your shit
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 17 2017 12:41 Nevuk wrote:
I find it amazing that someone is arguing for less privacy from government at a time when said government is headed by Donald Trump.
and we will have less trumps if you cant hide mob transactions from the press or the treasury
|
On February 17 2017 12:43 oneofthem wrote:
you dont believe in the possibility of good institutions. should just kill yourself then because the commie revolution will never come
I believe that all institutions have a strong possibility of being taken over by a fascist, and that protections against this should be reinforced rather than relaxed. I'm also no fan of communism for the same reason - I believe that type of accumulated power in a single institution inexorably leads towards extremely authoritarian states.
My main point was that Trump demonstrates the dangers with mass intrusion on privacy. If the people in power are mostly trust worthy then it could be acceptable, but there's no way to guarantee that. And generally knowing if people are trustworthy enough to elect to such positions of power is very difficult (knowing that they are not, on the other hand...)
On February 17 2017 12:58 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 12:41 Nevuk wrote:
I find it amazing that someone is arguing for less privacy from government at a time when said government is headed by Donald Trump. and we will have less trumps if you cant hide mob transactions from the press or the treasury
That's a fairer point, but it seems very difficult in our current system to ensure that billionaires can't just buy whatever they want, regardless of the laws (Epstein for instance getting off with very light penalties, as came up earlier). I'm really not sure why that is. Basically the US systems governing financial privacy seem exclusively set up for the benefit of corrupt billionaires (and not really helpful to non-corrupt ones).
|
On February 17 2017 12:55 oneofthem wrote:
it is very disappointing to see this bullshit from you. lay off the english department pipes.
everything ive said about how leftists think is generalizable to ideological thinking. you are just mad for whatever reason.
but sure, i am rather gloomy because leftists like you are so hilariously counterproductive and while i see a path forward it jsnt going to happen
dude, come on.
|
Ok, this is hilarious (hopefully to members of any political persuasion). I feel like CNN tweeting it is just going to give more ammo to Trump's attacks against the press for being "unfriendly" though.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
enjoy your basement protests. i'll just focus on capital accumulation because it aint gonna happen with this lolleft in charge
|
On February 17 2017 13:05 oneofthem wrote:
enjoy your basement protests. i'll just focus on capital accumulation because it aint gonna happen with this lolleft in charge
I mean it's pretty clear from attacks like this that you judge the value of a person's thoughts based upon their economic quality. Attack someone for living in a basement - it implies that they are poor, therefore, they have no value as a person. It's sad, what capitalism does to people.
|
On February 17 2017 13:09 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 13:05 oneofthem wrote:
enjoy your basement protests. i'll just focus on capital accumulation because it aint gonna happen with this lolleft in charge I mean it's pretty clear from attacks like this that you judge the value of a person's thoughts based upon their economic quality. Attack someone for living in a basement - it implies that they are poor, therefore, they have no value as a person. It's sad, what capitalism does to people.
I agree with you right up until the point where you start blaming it on capitalism. That part makes no sense.
|
basements are too moist for my liking.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i dont look down on basement. that was just for igne.
your soft punishment point is good, but the reason isnt due to some magical quality of the american legal or political system. it is because the bad guys are so much more politically effective. they get lobbyists to fight for loopholes in fiduciary rules and so on, while the left finds protesting gmos a much more worthwhile concern. point is though, with attention and political movement properly focused on aomething like white collar crimes, you can change that soft punishment
|
On February 17 2017 13:12 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2017 13:09 Nevuk wrote:On February 17 2017 13:05 oneofthem wrote:
enjoy your basement protests. i'll just focus on capital accumulation because it aint gonna happen with this lolleft in charge I mean it's pretty clear from attacks like this that you judge the value of a person's thoughts based upon their economic quality. Attack someone for living in a basement - it implies that they are poor, therefore, they have no value as a person. It's sad, what capitalism does to people. I agree with you right up until the point where you start blaming it on capitalism. That part makes no sense.
Eh, it's not JUST capitalism. That part was pure concern-trolling, I'll admit. I would attribute it more to binarism, if I had to be specific.
On February 17 2017 13:13 oneofthem wrote:
i dont look down on basement. that was just for igne.
your soft punishment point is good, but the reason isnt due to some magical quality of the american legal or political system. it is because the bad guys are so much more politically effective. they get lobbyists to fight for loopholes in fiduciary rules and so on, while the left finds protesting gmos a much more worthwhile concern. point is though, with attention and political movement properly focused on aomething like white collar crimes, you can change that soft punishment
I agree. That's part of why I actually do want to work within/with the system despite being very far to left. It does no good for anyone to pretend that it can be changed from the outside in a way that wouldn't be utterly horrific. The current system definitely has room for improvement, and people are far more likely to listen to someone who listens to them and tries to help them, rather than one who ignores them and does the same.
I personally find the GMO thing a little silly myself. The only point I ever heard that resonated with me at all was that we weren't sure of the long-term consequences, but that's true of so many things we put in our bodies. I'm more apt to focus on corn subsidies than GMOs when it comes to food issues.
The anti-vaxxers are far worse than the GMO protests, IMO.
|
|
|
President Donald Trump’s pick to replace ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn turned down an offer to join the administration after the president’s bizarre news conference on Thursday, several news outlets reported.
Vice Adm. Robert Harward, a retired Navy SEAL and former deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, reportedly was offered the job heading the White House National Security Council after Flynn was forced to step down for lying about Russian contacts. Harward is a senior executive at the defense contractor Lockheed Martin.
Harward rejected the job because of family commitments and financial concerns, according to a senior administration official.
“It’s purely a personal issue,” Harward told The Associated Press, adding that the Trump administration was “very accommodating to my needs, both professionally and personally.”
Harward took notice of Trump’s White House news conference on Thursday, a source told The Huffington Post. The president lashed out at the media, fiercely defended his administration’s performance during its chaotic first month and said Flynn had done nothing wrong in discussions with Russian officials before the inauguration.
Trump also told reporters he had an “outstanding” replacement in mind for national security adviser.
Harward and the White House may have disagreed on key issues, like staffing at the National Security Council. A source close to the situation told The Huffington Post that Harward wanted more freedom to bring in his own staff. Flynn’s former deputy, K.T. McFarland, had been expected to leave the administration after Flynn’s resignation, but it became clear on Thursday that Trump wanted her to stay.
Flynn resigned on Monday, following a Washington Post report that revealed he had spoken with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. about American sanctions prior to Trump’s inauguration, despite repeated assurances by administration officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, that he hadn’t done so. The Post later reported Trump had learned about Flynn’s call weeks earlier from the Department of Justice, but didn’t act until Flynn’s dishonesty with administration officials leaked. Flynn also lied about the Russian contact to FBI agents.
“He was doing his job and his counterparts, so it certainly would have been okay with me if he did it,” Trump said during his 77-minute press conference Thursday, referring to Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador. “I would have directed him to do it if I thought he wasn’t doing it. I didn’t direct him, but I would’ve directed him because that’s his job.”
CNN reported the FBI was unlikely to pursue charges against Flynn.
Source
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Being LM executive sounds cushy enough and less of a shitshow than being NSA right now.
|
this isn't so much important as completely insane
A Florida man's alleged plot to set off homemade explosives in several East Coast Target stores — part of what investigators said was a bizarre attempt to tank the company's stock — was foiled after someone he asked for help turned him in, prosecutors said Thursday.
Mark Charles Barnett, 48, of Ocala, was charged with "possession of a firearm (destructive device) affecting commerce by a previously convicted felon" after he offered an unidentified person $10,000 to put at least 10 explosives — disguised as food items — on the shelves of Target stores in New York, Florida and Virginia, according to a criminal complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Ocala.
"Barnett theorized that the company's stock value would plunge after the explosions, allowing him to cheaply acquire shares of Target stock before an eventual rebound in prices," the complaint said.
Barnett — a registered sex offender on probation for multiple felony kidnapping, sexual battery and grand theft counts — made the bombs at home and gave them to the individual, along with a bag of gloves, a mask and a license-plate cover, to complete the job, authorities alleged.
He showed the person 10 devices hidden in emptied-out containers of stuffing mix, breakfast bars and pasta, authorities said.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/florida-man-charged-trying-blow-target-stores-tank-company-s-n722071
wouldn't it simply be easier and legal to wait for a company to have some sort of explosion/major disaster and then just buy stock there without trying to blow up Targer?
|
On February 17 2017 14:59 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:this isn't so much important as completely insane Show nested quote +
A Florida man's alleged plot to set off homemade explosives in several East Coast Target stores — part of what investigators said was a bizarre attempt to tank the company's stock — was foiled after someone he asked for help turned him in, prosecutors said Thursday.
Mark Charles Barnett, 48, of Ocala, was charged with "possession of a firearm (destructive device) affecting commerce by a previously convicted felon" after he offered an unidentified person $10,000 to put at least 10 explosives — disguised as food items — on the shelves of Target stores in New York, Florida and Virginia, according to a criminal complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Ocala.
"Barnett theorized that the company's stock value would plunge after the explosions, allowing him to cheaply acquire shares of Target stock before an eventual rebound in prices," the complaint said.
Barnett — a registered sex offender on probation for multiple felony kidnapping, sexual battery and grand theft counts — made the bombs at home and gave them to the individual, along with a bag of gloves, a mask and a license-plate cover, to complete the job, authorities alleged.
He showed the person 10 devices hidden in emptied-out containers of stuffing mix, breakfast bars and pasta, authorities said.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/florida-man-charged-trying-blow-target-stores-tank-company-s-n722071wouldn't it simply be easier and legal to wait for a company to have some sort of explosion/major disaster and then just buy stock there without trying to blow up Targer?
yes it would. or you could short-sell the stock before trying to make it tank.
but to make a bunch of money off such things you need a fair bit of money to start with, and I doubt this guy had enough to make a proper kind of profit.
some criminals are idiots, which at least makes them easier to catch.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I suppose the current acting NSA is likely to keep his post, considering that tapping General Betray Us would be just inviting another scandal for no apparent purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
