But his offence budget, and the wall budget are to be increased. When will Washington start to give it's colonies like the bankrupt California some support, and stop wasting the American tax payers' money on regime changes and banking and pharma profit increases?
Currently, the US is paying about 0.4 trillion in interest payments a year. The US needs to cut 2-3 trillion a year to control the ever-expanding debt levels. So make those cuts 27 trillion in 10 years to produce any substantial impact on the US debt. 2.7 will do squat. The debt will double in 10 years to 45 trillion. The interest payments alone will be north of 1 trillion per year as the interest rate has nowhere to go but up. Tax revenues are at 3 trillion, you do the math. It is like if you were making 30K/year, bought 210K house and were paying 4K in interests on the mortgage and your wife wanted to remodel the home every year, hire gardeners and build a nice, metal fence around your property. But you spend 25K in living expenses, have no money for the renovations and/or for principal payments. What do you do? You borrow more, like 30K/year. So your debt level is increasing every year while you still make 30K/year. PS. Look at the February deficit, this is a train wreck waiting to happen: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-budget-deficit-widens-to-234-billion-in-february-2019-03-22?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahooAt some point the US is going to be forced into changing things, but for now the politicans are just going to kick the can into the next generation. It's not (at least right now) popular to cut spending to balance the budget, though there will be a time when this has to happen. Who knows when they see the writing on the wall. |
|
|
|
You can always claim a slot and wait to make the payment for your slot until you feel like there are enough people/slots participating.
It always goes that way, you question whether or not you should grab a slot and by the time you decide it is a good deal all the slots have gone.
Eh, I'll have to sleep on it and see Gator! I'm not too much of a winner on these raffles, hehe. Unless you'd like to bless me or something, maybe I'll win! |
|
|
|
News reports in the past couple weeks have continued to say that the Mueller report is going to be ending in the coming days (though who knows if this is true, as it's been said for sometime now) We do know that this has to go to Attorney General (William Barr), and then it will go through some sort of confidentially screenings, then it will be sent to Congress and then if William Barr wants it to be sent (with maybe more confidentially screenings) -- it will then be shown to the people. Barr is going to without a doubt release this to the public though, as I don't seem him as a Trump crony and someone who owes anything to the administration. With the amount of pressure from Congress and the people, he's going to release this report and the people are going to see it. I personally don't think this is going to be anything, as Trump has already stated that he is confident and he wants the people to see it. It might be cautious optimism, but it is still something. What do you all think about the report, and what's going to come out of it? https://www.apnews.com/093727be24b649f7adad971e0b48878d |
|
|
|
I had hopes that Brexit ad the actions in Italy and France were going to give us a chance to regain a bit of control. However it looks as if the bankers are retrenching. The increases in defence spending, and financial changes such as the privatising of the Rothschild bank in Switzerland are indications of this. I was a supporter of Trump, but he seems to be becoming more bellicose, and turning his back on his election promises. It's becoming quite difficult to plan for the future.
Didn't see you as someone to support Brexit, Frexit, and Italian Exit (or whatever you would call that) JET CASH WAS A SUPPORTER OF TRUMP? EXCUSE ME WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? California is bankrupt due to their own actions, plus I think they give more money to the federal government then they receive. So that's always something to think about. |
|
|
|
Without cash, it will be hard to finance bribes and other criminal activities. Z-cash anyone? Eh, people have been wiring money from some super weird accounts all over the world for decades now. People would find a way around this,greed is hell of a drug. Sweden being a small country with 11-12 million of population coming up with the plan to stop using cash and go completely onto digital payments is possible. Also the deadline is years away from the present day. Within this if the government plan in the right way they can easily implement the same serving as a model to the rest of the world countries.
Without a doubt true, makes it a lot easier to work with a country that is filled with mostly similar people that is very small. Geography is pretty close to the same. In a country like America, where you have about 350m or so people -- and there's no way this would work in a nation like the US (this quickly) I believe most if not all countries would like to be cashless. Cashless does not mean FIATless though. Digital banking will increase and card use will increase. Cryptocurrency will not take over from fiat any time soon and is pretty irrelevant to most countries.
My 2 satoshis if that matters.
+1 A country won't simply give up their economic control, people seem to forget that. Banks, politicans, etc will continue to hold their strangle. |
|
|
|
They have to do the same thing everyone does living in a truly free market: Search a better job, always. This is your best bargaining chip, no need to be violent or anything. When you get a better offer go to your boss and tell him/her either give a rise or accept the resign, as simple as that.
"Socialists" are mistaken pretending to fix everything by force using the State. No, you must not force anyone to pay "the same" due to gender, race, or religion, etc. If they are worth more, they will pay more, period. You can have women earning far more than men in other kind of jobs too.
If "socialists" manage to force their views into policy, the only net result is reduction of jobs offer, producing the opposite effect: Worse work conditions for women.
This is something that most people don't even do, doesn't matter if you're male or female. And honestly, it's pretty horrible to see -- because they're missing out on large amounts of money by not doing it. Job hopping is the only way to get bonuses today! Companies aren't loyal to you, and you should be ready to hop around every 3-4 years (obviously dependent on if that is even possible in your field, but still) |
|
|
|
|
Your question can better be stated as "Can I make enough money to support myself with gambling" And the most likely answer to this question is going to be no. You're not going to be able to beat the house edge at all, and never to the scale that would allow you to survive off of it.
The answer above relies on the fact that you're playing dice, slots, etc. If you're dealing with poker this is a different story, as this relies on your own personal skill, bankroll management, etc.
|
|
|
|
Makes zero sense
Bitcoin is designed to be a capitalist utility. Fascists are corporatist, making them anti-capitalist. This David Golumbia character obviously doesn't even know the basics of what he's talking about
Ah, that's what you think Though this man (David Golumbia) is simply tossing out buzzwords in an attempt to make people interested. BITCOIN, SOFTWARE, RIGHT WING EXTREMISM. Sounds like bullshit to me, common stuff in this fake news era though. |
|
|
|
|
I'm going to keep tabs on this, if enough people hop on so will I!
Leaving this thread on notify me
|
|
|
|
|
You can obviously see that he's joking when he's stating the part about Russia, he's pretty much saying that because he's being accused of being a Russian agent (and he thinks there is no proof and such, etc) so he's accusing them of the same thing that he is being accused of.
That's really it, you all have no sense of humor. Gosh.
|
|
|
|
Btw. Regarding government contractors or mercenaries fighting in a war, that was pretty common in the past.
We are just discovering what worked to some extent in the past several millenia.
Oh yeah I'm not saying it's not common or anything, though people forget that while US troops may not be in a certain area in the world (or are moving US troops out of certain areas) US mercenaries are in all of the other places (and are kept in the places the US is leaving. It's a way to please the people while saying that the troops are leaving, while the US presence NEVER really leaves. |
|
|
|
and not just because men are all misogynistic and hate women.
Nearly no one says that and anyone saying that is a complete dipshit. Two remarks: -You underestimate the wage gap by fully taking into account a factor: education. Education isn't at all equal regarding genders, women are less likely to obtain highly rewarded education. And it has been very easily proven that social influence is a big part of that. Now I'm not saying we should have 50/50 of both genders in all fields but fact is that when you experiment the results of two classes, one with mixed genders and one with only girls, you obtain significant differences of results, self assessment and orientation choices. That means education is already gender flawed so not taking that into account is a huge difference. -Your reasonning on the fact that capitalism wouldn't allow pay gap is heavily flawed by the fact that capitalism is NOT able to assess objectively the abilities of employees. It means that if people are biased into thinking that women will perform less they will get paid less even though they don't actually perform less. Apart from that the fact is that there isn't much that can be done. What's the solution for women going into education though? Should government incentivize this by throwing more money into secondary education specifically towards women, giving them more financial aid to attend schools? Women themselves don't choose to go into the high paying fields, that's not something the government should be solving by telling people what to do with their lives. There's nothing wrong with having more men in one field and more women in another, it just so happens that the ones the men flock to are higher-paying. And in no way, shape, or form are men/ women from either one of their own dominated fields stopping men/women from coming in. I obviously stated what I stated about Capitalism because the typical line is as such "Women make 25 percent while working at the same exact job as a man, right next to him! If that was the case, and they both had the same output -- then only women would be hired. It's pretty simple. |
|
|
|
The 'Wage Gap' which is the theory stated by those in the left that state that women make 25 cents less than a man for the same work. People on the left state that this is the reason that equality isn't present in the world and that women are still subservient to men. I personally have always disputed these theories, even after I read the studies, my line of thinking was very simple. My theory was that Capitalism (and the greed that comes with it) would never allow a gender gap to be present. Corporations are so greedy (for good reason) that they would NEVER pay 25 percent more for the same work. The entire corporate world would be filled with women, and everywhere would hire women if they could legally pay them 25 percent less. I'm going to lay out some of the information relating to it. Where did this information come from?Well, that's a pretty complicated thing to try to search for. Though through my own personal studies I found a link to this website -- https://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/ -- which is the website for the American Association of University Women. You can see the clear bias that is present in their name, they're going to have a shift towards women in a way to get more donations and such. The stats that they reference at this website is from Bureau of Labor Department which is simply comapring the median earnings of full-time workers across the entire workforce. I don't know if you notice the problem with this, but it's a pretty simple one to notice. You can't compare the median income of both, because men and women get different jobs with different pay. Men actually gravitate towards higher paying jobs, while women gravitate towards lower-paying jobs( SOURCE). So with this in mind, you can see that these studies are wrong and are harping on information that they KNOW is wrong. They're using this as a way to further their own objective and to raise more money. They use peoples inability to go read a study and verify sources as a way to continue to spread their false news. Is there any gender gap?Well yes, but the real number is a LOT lower. When you factor in all of the other variables (that the first study nicely disregarded) such as job type, education, etc -- then the REAL wage gap is around 2 cents. So 2 percent. ( SOURCEThough from my reading, there are two reasons for this. 1. Women won't typically negotiate their salaries, and that's a fact based on studies. ( SOURCE) 2. Women (in a traditional household) typically take time off when they have kids, and they're unable to 'catch up' from the lost time, experience, income, etc to be able to compare fairly to men. ( SOURCESo personally, I still go back to the point that the only reason for the wage gap are for the two above reasons (there may be more, but still) and not just because men are all misogynistic and hate women. |
|
|
|
The draft is unconstitutional.
I mean you can debate that here all you want, but the courts seem to think otherwise. Though even if IT IS -- it most likely will never be used again, so I think we're good! WOMEN WILL NOW BE INCLUDED IN THE MILITARY DRAFT IN THE USA
When I was in the military, we were told women were not drafted because of the chivalrous nature of men. If a soldier falls, you need to continue the advance, not stop and help (her). I don't know if this was a joke, but --hm? Didn't know you were in the army Vod. So what if the general position of the American establishment and community (mostly in face of young progressive liberals)?
Is military service a thing that is made by men to get rid of their aggressive masculinity or they require equality in rights to kill (or being killed by) muslims in the middle east?
No clue what the hell you're trying to say here. |
|
|
|
People seem to forget, time and time again, that the crimes that Manafort was charged on (and found guilty on) charges that were completely unrelated to the Trump campaign. Headlines that say 'ex-trump chief' or something along the lines which makes the attempt to relate the two together are doing it for clicks and not for journalistic integrity. All of his crimes relate to things that happened around the years of 2010-2013. Work that was done UNRELATED to the Trump campaign. I think it's fair to entertain the argument that the Trump team may have done a bad job screening him, though I don't think him getting in trouble for a completely unrelated charge is the reason for someone to say that Trump is without a doubt a foreign agent due to this. Here's a BBC quote explaining the charges he's been found guilty on: Last week, a judge in Alexandria, Virginia, sentenced Manafort to nearly four years for hiding millions of dollars of income earned by his consulting work for pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine. Manafort was involved with the Trump campaign from March thru August of 2016. It's pretty clear that when it became apparent that he had some issues, he was removed from that job. So to me it looks like Trump did everything RIGHT. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-paul-manaforts-role-trump-campaign/story?id=50808957 The Associated Press reported Aug. 18 that Manafort's firm had lobbied in the United States on behalf of the ruling Ukrainian political party even though Manafort did not disclose his work as a foreign agent, as mandated by federal law. Aug. 19, 2016 Manafort's departure from the campaign came the next day. On Aug. 19, Trump released a statement confirming Manafort's exit and praising his work on the campaign. "This morning Paul Manafort offered, and I accepted, his resignation from the campaign,” Trump said in the statement. “I am very appreciative for his great work in helping to get us where we are today, and in particular his work guiding us through the delegate and convention process. Paul is a true professional and I wish him the greatest success.” Well yes, exactly. He was removed when they learned, which is exacty that I'd like to see. I don't think its fair to paint President Trump (nor the rest of the administration) as Russian agents simply because of the fact that Manafort is in trouble due to work he did BEFORE the administration People forget this part, and it's something I wanted to re-cement. |
|
|
|
Banning guns isn't about saving lives. It's about gaining power. If the gun-grabbers wanted to save lives they should be focusing on about a dozen other subjects first.
Ironically the same people who claim to care about saving lives by banning guns tend to promote the type of governance system (socialism/communism) that cost more humans their lives than anything else humanity has ever conceived. Not even auto accidents come anywhere close to reaching the monumental loss of life attributed to communism.
Agree with ya People seem to forget that most gun deaths are suicides, and these people would most likely be dying either way -- unless we address mental health concerns instead of focusing on the tool that they're using. I do understand the arguments that this 'tool' is more lethal, though I still do personally think that if a person is trying to kill them self there is really little to no way to screen against that if they go to purchase a weapon and have no past mental health history to help them be denied. Communism has killed a hundred million people, and we still see people running around advocating for it and loving Karl Marx! |
|
|
|
Very true, but it's worth remembering that by no means all the deluded fools who think they can print money forever are socialists. If I have learned anything about Socialists it is they almost never identify as Socialists (really Marxist). They always identify as the latest rebranding term to inject their ideology into things, because "it will be different this time." The sad thing is they usually don't even know enough about the basis for their own ideologies to identify themselves as Marxists. +1 Socialists always argue that 'that isn't what OUR socialism / communism / whatever is going to be like, we're going to do it differently.' Yes, and that always seems to work out so well for you right. Communism has killed hundreds of millions of people, and if allowed to spread it will collapse entire nations. |
|
|
|
Democrats are blaming Trump in everything and claiming that he is a russian puppet and even that Trump was assigned by Putin to become a US president. We've witnessed an extremely fast degradation of most American media....
Or perhaps a rapid revealing of what it has always been... Evidence of 'what is has always been' I see nothing from the Mueller team, and it seems like there's going to be nothing that comes out of that report. If it wasn't a nothing-burger there probably would have been tons of leaks that would have been coming out of it already. |
|
|
|
I think with all the other news that has been in the cycle, a good deal of us missed this pretty large ruling that was going to have to come in this day and age. I don't think if it it will ever have to be put into effect, though it is VERY interesting. WOMEN WILL NOW BE INCLUDED IN THE MILITARY DRAFT IN THE USAI know this had been fought on on both political sides to say that there wasn't full equality in the USA. Conservatives pointed to it as saying that some women only want to reap the rewards of equality, but don't want to reap the consequences. While this was out of their control, I highly doubt anyone truly does want to be drafted for the US military. Progressives pointed to this fact in statating that if there is true equality women and men will be included in the military system (as they are now currently allowed in combat roles, though up to now they weren't included in the draft) I do think that the reason this didn't hit the news cycle was that it will most likely never be used, I highly DOUBT there will ever be a draft in the United States ever again. Most wars are going to be fought through defense contractors (practically mercenaries, but paid by the US government), crazy tech (drones, robots, etc) The judge even stated in his ruling such Yes, to some extent this is symbolic, but it does have some real-world impact," said Marc Angelucci, the lawyer for the men challenging the draft. "Either they need to get rid of the draft registration, or they need to require women to do the same thing that men do. Government Contractors being used in wars are pretty interesting, and I think it's supported by both sides. As politicians can say that they're bringing US troops home and don't have to talk about the private guys they have their fighting for them. Crazy concept, amazing politically, but it really hides stuff from the American people. Maybe I'll write a little topic on it, don't know if people would be interested. Thoughts on this though? (Self moderated just to remove sig spam, I would NEVER silence any opposing argument) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
