It started much sooner than what. When Europe became dependent on Russia for their energy needs, it was entirely foreseeable that something like this would happen. Wait till it gets colder outside and people have to battle a chilling winter with high energy costs. Green energy initiatives certainly don't seem to be having the greatest ROI.

Fire up the coal/nuclear energy plants in Europe. U.S. should have also been ramping up their energy production and flood the market with cheap energy, it would decrease Russia's leverage.

I'm more concerned at how many people are throwing money at these sob stories without the realization that their money never even gets seen by the subjects in the video suffering from poverty. The fees that impact the donations are part of the problem, but the bigger problem is social media grifters exploiting suffering children for their gain. Tiktok is a malignant tumor on society.

Law of diminishing returns applies. How much is enough?

Exactly. A business isn't a true business if it requires government subsidies in order to remain operational. I'm not oppose to government propping up businesses with subsidies if they meet the public need. A lot of farming operations receive government subsidies for the obvious reason it's within the public interest for there to be a surplus of food. More recently I'm seeing tech start ups in the green sector receive government loans/subsidies. These business wouldn't last a second without these low interest loans. And of course, when the business goes up in flames, the public is left with debt burden.

I don't think crypto anarchy is an attractive concept for the masses. In fact, most people are perfectly comfortable with the idea of a government backed fiat system because they prefer centralization over decentralization for the sake of stability. Digressing from the conversation that government currency is in fact unstable, stick with libertarianism.

The libertarians parties IMO aren't as pro-crypto as some fiscal conservatives can be. A fiscal conservative would believe in pro-market capitalism, so if perhaps a competitive environment between all currencies instead of propelling government backed fiat. Would libertarians support regulating the crypto industry for under the guise of consumer protections? Does being pro-liberty mean being anti-corporation for the sake of consumer liberty? I'm not sure.

Regardless, conservative parties all over the world already have reasonable footing in most countries. It's easier to get them to adopt a pro-crypto platform than it would be for liberals. Getting libertarians into power is a hassle and just fragment the vote ensuring the liberal majorities get power. I'm not interested in propping up libertarians that will just take votes from the conservatives when electing pro-crypto conservatives could be done with a fraction of the effort/liability.

GDP reports for the U.S. economy's Q3 growth will be releasing soon, except recession. The unemployment rate is a lagging indicator of the state of the economy. Usually companies will only reduce their staff if they want immediate relief of operating cost. It allows them to retain their employees till the last the minute, despite what the GDP report says. So, it's economic recession, then a rise in unemployment. The market can react independent of these factors, but will generally use these factors in their assessment. It's not a rule.

Unemployment rate fell modestly for now, but the next 6 months would be the data that I would look for if I want to make inferences about the U.S. economy's state. Clearly the market thinks that we're in for a tumultuous time so they know something the stats don't tell us.

They banned gambling from "unlicensed" providers and they consider any company with a Curacao gaming license as unlicensed. Obviously this was to put a blanket ban on most of the gambling content that people were publishing, though I suppose someone could possibly circumvent the ban if there are providers that Twitch considers to have legitimate licenses.


Why is YouTube worse than twitch? They have massive global market share, just not in livestreaming. Their political censorship is overboard but I understand wanting to waive liability from the tech censorship overlords by banning discussion of contentious political topics. Gambling isn't as taboo so it seems like they allow gambling content to be published.

It shouldn't, but you should also define what a gambler means.

If you gamble for fun, which is what it should be, then I don't consider this a problem nor do I really consider you to be a gambler. A gambling addiction, on the other hand, wouldn't make me think less of you, only that you have a psychological health problem that should be treated akin to a drug problem.

The only society that actually considers gambling to be sinful are Islamic societies. Gambling's haram (just like everything else in civil society).

COVID-19 accelerated the flights to Texas and Florida of California residents fleeing their miserable state. California went heavy with the lockdowns and restrictions, people got tired of it. CA can't really handle their debt anymore either, while Texas and Florida have a balanced economy.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/debt-by-state

Texas and Florida have the least debt out of all states. And if I'm not mistaken, both states do not collect income taxes either. Lower tax burden than California, and it's safer.

California will continually blame corporate greed for their horrid economic policy of high taxes and high regulations, and it'll drive even more companies out to relocate.

Woman, 23, survives 2016 ISIS bombing attack, is euthanized.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11291995/Woman-23-survived-2016-Brussels-airport-ISIS-bomb-euthanised-Belgium.html


She was 17 at the time and suffered from depression from the attack. She was able to get two psychiatrist to sign off on her request to be euthanized as it's legal in Belgium. And if things could not get worse, she was admitted into a mental institution in 2018 and was sexually assaulted by another patient, prompting a suicide attempt. It's rather harrowing that the state can participate in your voluntary execution. Does it seem reasonable at all for a 23 year old to decide they don't want to live anymore, and assist in their demise?

She was too young and doped up on all kinds of drugs. No where near the mental state to consent to voluntary execution.

As a point of clarification, debt isn't necessarily a metric that can directly be correlated to inflation. Debt to GDP ratio is something that I would pay attention to, and to your point, the money printing in 2020 caused the debt to GDP ratio to fall out of reasonable proportion. Debt can be a great thing as long as the economy continues to grow. Unfortunately the U.S. economy is stagnating so reducing spending is essentially the only way debt will be reduced. High inflation reduces the value of the existing debt the U.S. has to repay, but it also would cause new incoming debt to be placed at a higher interest rate by the issuer. Obviously it isn't in the interest for the U.S. government to continually spend money and have their currency inflate, so they wouldn't attempt to keep up inflation rates for the sake of reducing their debt burden.

If government agencies fighting for control over the regulation of a financial market doesn't scare you, I'm not sure what does.

Realistically it doesn't matter what agency is responsible for crypto regulation, the bureaucratic red tape is impenetrable. SEC is already dabbling in crypto regulations so it seems redundant to have even more agencies request Congress that they have oversight. Seems to me the consumer suffers by having to jump through so many hoops in order to be compliant with regulations. The government won't hesitate to sanction you financially if you commit even the slightest violation, so it isn't in the interest of the consumer to have agencies fighting over one another for oversight. Not that the government would care, obviously. They have little concern for the crypto space, and it's within their interest that the scene die.

This is my personal preference as well though the ad disclosure space seems like the wild west. Is it actually required that someone displaying an advertisement explicitly say they are financially compensated for said ad? I don't really think so.

If someone suspects a conflict of interest, I figure it would be the consumer to immediately assume there is one unless explicitly stated otherwise.

The Predatory KYC casinos I've seen will wait till the user hits a large withdrawal and then force KYC. Some of the shady casinos, now defunct, went down this path and would happily allow users to deposit funds and lose them without ever requesting verification. If the player won, they wouldn't honor the withdrawal.

I generally only categorize casino's legitimacy by allowing anonymous withdrawals. If there is a clear limit that's established before a player deposit before KYC is enforced, I'm okay with that too as long as the player is made aware.

Good. More jobs available for people that actually hope to achieve the company's goal. Reports suggest the internal Twitter employee group chats were in tears over the finalization of the deal. It's a bit odd though, the Twitter board was desperate for this deal to go through. So it seemed like the board was at odds with its employees, but it wouldn't be the first time inner turmoil of a company.

I would suggest to Elon in the start that he needed to fire the woksters the moment he stepped in. It seems as if they're saving him the trouble and resigning themselves. Good for them, less work for Elon to find the trouble makers that would sabotage his company from within.

Elon is tripping towards the finish line here. He never intended on buying Twitter and wanted to bail out last minute after realizing he overpaid. Perhaps he was interested in completing the deal at a lower price, or wanted to drop the entire thing after he realized there wasn't a way to make it profitable to recoup his cash.

My hope is a decentralized social media platform, the reality will be something much less. Twitter is beyond savable. If you've spent any time reading the content on the platform, the best course of action is nuking it entirely and starting from scratch. The bots, political astroturfing, algorithm manipulation are all too palpable.

Elon Musk proceeds with Twitter 44 billion dollar Twitter acquisition.

https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-twitter-inc-technology-business-f52c7655942aaab05ee5be7a1388e0fd

Womp Womp.

He hired a very expensive law firm to fight his legal battle. I suppose they told him the truth of this unwinnable case and he finally conceded.

In a perfect world, Twitter would be sent to the gulag to rot because it is worthless and has displaced society backwards. It's not savable. Somebody would need to start over from scratch, first by nuking all of its users and content.

I understand this is a hotel chain but consider all the smaller hotels before it that have closed down already for which no one has batted an eye.

The operating costs will hurt small businesses the most. Larger corporations might have the resources to temporarily foot the bill, or lobbying power to pull strings on a governmental level that may help alleviate financial burdens. Small businesses will be stuck with nothing. You're seeing the COVID effect all over again. During COVID lockdowns and supply chain constrictions, small businesses weren't able to keep up with government regulations or labor shortages that resulted from the lockdowns (that is, for the businesses that were given the luxury of remaining open). Businesses went under, the corporations prevailed.

Energy costs operate in a similar fashion. It's the bigger players that will incur these cost and they will gladly take the markets share away from the businesses that can't keep up. I suppose after a while, not even the corporations will be able to keep up.

Actually I would not find it too shocking if competitors would pay other people to post disparaging remarks on other casinos if it was compulsory to gain market share. It just doesn't make much sense now because there's a wide range of casinos to choose from, whom each have their own market share, so it would seem like a labor intensive task to begin disinformation campaigns about other companies and plaguing review sites with a bunch of made up stories. Could've been a viable strategy back in the day I suppose, there weren't a lot of platforms out there. I remember when PrimeDice was one of the only legitimate and reputable BTC dice platforms out there. Now, of course, there's many.


I just use this forum and look at the gambling threads with a bunch of replies. Then I'll do some research on the different platforms and see what their KYC policy is, and withdrawal verification, if any. You're describing a performance issue with some of the games, seems to me that could be something that's on your end, not the casino's end. A lot of the games/slots are 3rd party anyways.

The federal reserve was trying to play a balancing game with inflation and their hope was to not slam the breaks in hopes of avoiding a recession -- call it a soft landing if you will. Seeing as the USD inflation rate is still out of control regardless of the interest rates, fed will avoid the soft landing and accept that recession is unavoidable. To your point on money flowing to crypto, I think if the U.S. economy is thriving, then the crypto industry compartmentalized within is thriving. Obviously the U.S. economy is in ditch, and so is Bitcoin's current price.

I'm patiently waiting the Q3 GDP reports, I'm predicting a bloodbath.