This is the actual WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/21/russia-nord-stream-explosions/Archive: https://archive.vn/1CPAlHow quick the establishment was to blame Russia with a lack of evidence was palpable. Seems like the are more interested in escalation than anyone else given their tendency to throw around accusations without actual proof. There wasn't a reason for Russia to blow up Nord Stream because if it had actually been them, then it would have prompted an aggressive international response. Which country is interested in seeing Russia wiped from the planet? Who has a motive? |
|
|
|
|
Article is suggesting that the crops are dying due to climate change are completely unsubstantiated. Crops die every year in harsh/severe weather. Attributing weather anomalies to climate change is dishonest.
Anyways, if the price of food rises then it's usually warranted that the government provide greater subsidies to the agricultural sector than it already does. Corn and wheat are already subsidized -- if the supply dips severely which would threaten food supplies, then the U.S. government has more than enough resources to increase production. Effects won't be immediate, obviously, but it helps for the future.
|
|
|
|
Increasing awareness of climate change is pushing utilities to phase out fossil fuel-based sources of energy that generate carbon emissions. Renewables like wind and solar don’t contribute to climate change, but have period where they don’t generate any energy (when the sky is dark or the wind is still).
The bottom line is that Biden's energy policies want to bring the US closer to the model of Cuba or Venezuela where power outages are commonplace. Politicians are specialists in offering solutions to the problems they themselves create, so it is not surprising to see Biden pleading with Venezuela or Saudi Arabia about oil when it is a problem he himself created. Our financial markets and trends are operating under a post abundance economy?
Rather, they are operating under a socialist political economy, like Carter's, who told people that if they were cold in the winter, what they had to do was cover themselves with a blanket. As soon as someone comes into office who lowers taxes and removes regulations, energy production will return to that of a first world country. Not just Biden, the progressive fascists and/or socialists want fundamental changes to the global energy system based on fossil fuels and transition it to unsustainable renewables that wouldn't even come close to meeting global energy demand. Rolling blackouts or government rationing of energy happens every year, usually in the winter, when they don't have enough energy to go around. The environmentalists would rather have people freeze to death rather than create the necessary carbon pollution in order to warm homes. |
|
|
|
|
Switzerland is historically a neutral country, you might try there.
But understand -- if the world bursts into a nuclear war there is no safe place but an underground bunker with a large food supply. It's not that you would be killed by a nuke or the nuclear radiation necessarily, it's that global supply chains would be disrupted and your local grocery store has less than a week of supplies before the shelves are empty. If people panic buy, than the shelves empty out in less than a day. Under this scenario, there is no safe location where you live in luxury. The world turns to hell and you're along for the ride whether you want to be or not.
|
|
|
|
|
This has always been a strategy recruiters use, it's only been amplified because very liberal jurisdictions that want more "fairness" in the job market demand employers post the salary range on all job posts instead of allowing the recruiter and applicant to negotiate compensation IN the final stages of selection. There isn't a salary that would be a one size fits all for every applicant so it's useless for recruiters to post the top line salary when they might settle for a lesser employee with lesser skills, demanding smaller compensation.
|
|
|
|
The Politicians will try to ruin crypto and force KYC on every clean and unclean exchanges out there, this is a good opportunity for them to promote CBDC too because of this FTX fraud but I am here to tell you that FTX and Crypto are not the same things, FTX is a private company that did many bad things behind the curtain and Cryptocurrency is the most fascinating technology that humanity has ever emerge with.
Don't get it confused.
CBDC's will be implemented independently of the FTX fiasco. Government realizes they have the perfect opportunity to regulate exchanges/crypto sector using FTX as the scapegoat, when the reality is FTX was a fraudulent organization ran by corrupt leaders. So, expect regulations to come out of this, not a launch of CBDC's. CBDC's will have the same problem FTX had, in a sense. Central authority and a reliance to trust the holder of your funds. I don't suppose it'd be prudent for the government to pitch to its citizens the same idea wrapped in a different package. Not now, at least. |
|
|
|
|
The poll is useless. If he wanted to step down as CEO, he would have already made up his mind and had the next CEO lined up, using this poll as a formality. Had he not intended to step down, then it seems to me he won't abide by the results of the poll.
Twitter is hemorrhaging money, and it Elon must be looking at the sunken cost as justification to keep it alive. I've said early on there's a good chance it collapses if it can't lower its debt and turn a profit.
|
|
|
|
I mean insurances, 404k, paid vacations, bonuses, etc.
If not, I am afraid big companies might take advantage of freelance workers in order to get job done while having no legal strings attached to them. Or am I wrong on this one?
Uber and Lyft follow this business model (ride share servies). In jurisdictions where Uber and Lyft operate, their employees are considered contractors, or freelancers. It ensures that these companies do not need to pay out benefits to full time employees or adhere to federal regulations and worker protections. It's not necessarily a bad thing, though. The idea of freelance work is not adhering to a strict schedule and being in charge of your own time. If companies allow you the freedom to choose your own hours with at will employment at the expense of certain benefits, it isn't necessarily predatory. |
|
|
|
There was a police department in the U.S. that strapped explosives to a robot to kill a mass murder: https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/us/dallas-police-robot-c4-explosives/index.htmlAnd in fact, it worked. Strap a bunch of C4 to a remote controlled vehicle, then bring it close to the suspect and detonate. Sure, there might be a little clean up required afterwards but it did kill the guy. Next, they might strap gatling guns to these robots so it won't make such a mess. A small taste as to what law enforcement might look like in the future. Then when these devices get AI software installed, that's when the real fun begins. |
|
|
|
A lot of tech stocks are falling from their pandemic highs but Tesla is falling disproportionately lower than the rest. Part of it is the U.S. economy approaching a recession, if not already in recession, other part is clearly his Twitter antics. Tesla was overvalued and the marketing gimmicks of Elon promoting Tesla as a "technology" company and not a vehicle manufacture have gotten rather old. Elon Musk is one of the best examples of "any publicity is good publicity".
It's true to an extent but Elon gives me the impression that he's a bit emotionally unstable over the past month. That's not good for business. |
|
|
|
There is need to control world population since more people means we need more resources, while the resources available on earth are not unlimited.
Why? Earth has plenty of resources. World population will stabilize itself eventually as resources allow naturally so there isn't a need to step in. China tried the one-child policy already and it was rather dystopian for the government to dictate how many children people could have. "Population control" is a concept pushed by elites who view people below them as malignant tumors to Earth. Also pushed by radical environmentalist who believe every human is a pollutant to the environment. |
|
|
|
|
What is someone going to do? They get ripped by FTX and they live across the world, so they're going to take up arms somehow and retaliate against FTX HQ? Doubtful.
These companies are getting away with user funds because they know for certain that the government will either let them do it, or that they know the consumers have no recourse. It's not as if a company operating in the Bahamas is ever going to fear what their users are going to do when they live literally all over the world after they steal the money and take a plane ride to a non-extradition safe haven.
|
|
|
|
If convicted, what could SBF get for vaporizing 10B USD? Perhaps the rest of his life?
Well if you take the history of billionaire criminals into account then he will probably be a free man within weeks or months, even if he were to be convicted lawfully (as he should be). Justice usually fails when bribed. Worst case scenario for him: he will spend a couple of years in a luxury prison which cannot even be called a real prison, or under "house arrest". He probably has some money hidden away in some obscure accounts/addresses that nobody knows even exist. He deserves way way worse. He is a thief. A rich thief. All the evidence is there but nobody prosecutes the rich (as long as they are "rich enough") I'm cautiously optimistic. Once the U.S. Dept. of Justice indicts then he has almost sealed his fate. The feds have something like a 95% conviction rate so even with the best lawyers SBF will retain, they can't make bad facts disappear. And it's an unquestionable fact that SBF was oversaw the vaporization of billions in user funds. How his lawyers will try and explain away SBF's role will be up to them, of course. If he gets convicted he'll be sent to a federal prison, most likely low security as many other white collar criminals. Won't be a hardened max security prison, but it also won't be luxury. |
|
|
|
|
My understanding is the world could have had nuclear energy for the past couple of decades but they chose not to over misleading environmental concerns and instead elected for oil/gas. It's not as if the technology for nuclear related energy isn't there, it's been there for decades but the climate change environmentalist had a successful propaganda campaign against nuclear energy which dissuaded countries from using it.
I don't have the technical knowledge to determine how nuclear fusion differentiates itself from the current methods of nuclear energy production -- I can say with certainty that it will be met with the same level of resistance regardless of how clean it is.
|
|
|
|
Animal testing isn't unethical
You know the issue isn't simply that he's using Animals for tests. Come on now. What number of animal deaths are ethical and what number are unethical? Recall when beagles were locked in cages with sandflies so the insects could eat the dogs alive in a laboratory that was funded by the NIH, were there many discussions on what the ethical consideration for animal testing were by the same people upset about Neuralink? I'm not aware. The concern for animal safety is selective. |
|
|
|
|
Animal testing isn't unethical, this is just more dirt that's being used to muddy the waters because the radicals are upset Elon's allowing a bit more speech on a platform that is dominated by purple haired leftist living in San Francisco.
The medical experimentation is better done on animals than humans. So unless the folks that are complaining would be willing to volunteer themselves testing, then they shouldn't be complaining.
|
|
|
|
1.This might be fake news. 2.Bitcoin isn't "buying" banks. A company called "Bitcoin Group" is supposedly trying to buy a bank. The company might be called "Bitcoin Group" but that doesn't mean anything(it doesn't necessarily mean that this is a crypto company). You could name your company "Bitcoin" or "Satoshi" and offer fiat financial services at the same time.  3.Who cares if this is the oldest bank in the world? I couldn't care less, even if this bank was founded in 1135 or 1066. Well, I hope more Crypto companies will start doing the same.... because we see more and more Banks pushing back and some even blocking people's Bank accounts, when they find out that they are using their Bank accounts to buy Crypto currencies. We need to buy the Banks, if they do not want to work with us.... We need " Bitcoin friendly Banks" that will take clients away from Banks that wants to sabotage us.  No bank can be "Bitcoin friendly" without the permission of the central bank and the government. Good luck trying to run a "Bitcoin friendly" bank. A bank's more than welcome to hold crypto assets if it wants, unless they live in dictatorship hell hole with a complete ban on private enterprise. But realistically, the banks have shunned Bitcoin because it's not a profitable enterprise for them in the immediate short term. It's easy to take liquid capital and invest in into other assets that might give them a more predictable return. I don't think governments are incentivized yet to tell the major financial institutions that they can't keep crypto in their holdings. |
|
|
|
|
These are just microloans that are done between consumer and merchant without involving larger banks. There are probably banks behind this that sponsor the program and give part of the interest the consumer pays over to the merchant, but it isn't the traditional mortgage or car loan debt burden. It's often predatory, high interest rates if the consumer misses a payment and people that aren't great with their finances are more inclined to take on loans that eventually pile.
Is it worth taking a loan for low ticket items that you're forced to pay interest on?
|
|
|
|
I'm first not sure I can agree with BlackRock here in their assessment. As someone who also closely follow financials (being that it's my job to do so), I've seen countless outlets predicting a recession for years now. I remember back in 2016 there was a big "recession" scare that never materialized.
I'm not saying it's not going to happen, but I just wouldn't bank on it. Yes this should be bitcoins time to shine, with inflation being where it's at, but unfortunately bitcoin is still too closely related to the stock market. I'm not sure we are going to see this separation anytime soon (though I sure hope we do).
There were economic indicators that a recession was coming pre-COVID that had the financial sector a bit on edge, but post COVID it became obvious a recession was coming. Nearly all the big banks lowered their economic projections for the U.S. GDP, and of course, the U.S. economy largely has domino effect on the rest of the global economy. Europe experiencing large energy price hikes contributed to lower economic growth and the UK had a small bump in GDP recently but the central banks are still forecasting a recession. |
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm glad I was wrong. I didn't think he would face any criminal charges.
Read the charges briefly, he's facing up to life in prison but no one is ever sentenced at the top of sentence recommendations. If he is in fact guilty after proper due process, throw the book at him.
Elizabeth Holmes frauded about 700M USD, she got 13 years in prison.
Bernard Lawrence Madoff frauded 65B USD, he got 150 years.
If convicted, what could SBF get for vaporizing 10B USD? Perhaps the rest of his life?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
