undergroundoverground @ undergroundoverground @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

518

Joined

1 yr. ago

I said it just fine. The problem is you lack of self awareness and poor social skills.

I love how you declared my example to be lazy, only to then make, essentially, the same example again. Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying that I disagree with me.

The problem is, you have one side whos worried their candidate might be too old and another who doesn't even care if their candidate raped a child and tried to overthrow their government.

However, for reasons no one can quite explain, only one of them is being called to drop out of the race.

Haha so true. I remember some my friend's family going on about how we should all vote leave because of all the immigrants.

Mate, you were born in Napoli. You're as Italian as spaghetti. I'm not that kind of British person and, as far as I'm concerned, you're more than welcome here but you're the "immigrant" you hate so much. Not only that, your that being that person while banging on about how bad immigration is to a group of very obviously white native British people. It was just the most bizarre thing ever.

He still has an accent.

I genuinely wanted to be like "but we like you." I don't think that would have gone down very well though.

Remember everyone, CEOs do this stuff at the behest of capital. The shareholders want you to be annoyed at the CEO whos simply acting on their orders. Its part of the reason they pay CEOs so much.

They want us to be annoyed at everyone but the shareholders. Capital has always been the problem.

Oh yeah, those personal finance places all want to talk about the laffer curve, right up until you remind people how high the X value would be. Then, as if by magic, they dont want to talk about them anymore.

To me, those places always seems full of AstroTurfing for the idea of lowering taxes for rich people. There might be some good stuff in there but I would take them main political thrusts made with about as much salt as you can find.

Never ask a man his salary, a woman her age or a neoclassical economist what economic problems tax breaks for the rich won't fix.

To much money to spend on health care?

Tax breaks for the rich.

To little money to spend on healthcare?

Tax cuts for the rich.

Just the right amount of money to spend on healthcare?

Just the right time to cut taxes for the rich.

Conservatives don’t search for things that discredit their view.

I think you're right here but I think we can all be very much like that. Using trump and conservatives as a reference to what we all do, no one Googles "is trump bad." No, we already know the answer to what we think about that. Instead, we google something like "trump is the best" which (along with our personalised algorithm, designed to tell us what we want to hear so we keep engaged) tells us all about how trump is the best.

I think one thing that might help anyone who wants to de-program trumpers, along with the parts that are their own fault, they genuinely are victims of the algorithm they're trapped in. I mean, we all are but right wingers, being right wingers, rarely have the self awareness needed to adjust for it. Theyre amongst the groups most disenfranchised and exploited by these things. It doesn't absolve them of blame but, imo, its more complicated than a lot of people make out.

I think you're right. Sadly, none of them have any idea how ultra manipulated the price of things like gold and silver are.

I mean, it has appreciated in value since then but if you caught it wrong, with a load of futures, expecting it to "shoot to the moon", you'll lose everything which was the plan. It was literally firms and funds trying to cover the losses they made on gamestop.

"I put it to you, your honour, that that child is sexy."

For me, it became undeniable after the gamestop fiasco. I used to sub to wallstreetbets way back before all that. It was one of the last genuinely funny places on the internet. I'm lucky, i got in on those shares at £45 and sold at roughly somewhere round about £420.69.

After the day the price shot up to that, the place was just flooded with bots trying to get anyone to spend their money in any place but gamestop. You even had some mugs trying to short silver which, for anyone not in the know, you'd need about all the money in the world to do that.

But yeah, now, everything going on there is going to be ultra analysed by every fund in the world. Oh, they also fired all the admins and replaced them just before the flood gates opened.

I think its then that people saw the potential for flooding reddit with bots and shills.

Antinatalism is the first law of robotics, reduced to absurdity. It answers the question by forgetting why you asked it in the first place.

Yes, it does eliminate human suffering. However, it does so in the same way that a bullet to the head cures a headache.

Like the rest of them, hes more than happy to tax other peoples earnings, for using his things. He loves it. In fact, its his favourite part.

So, I hope no one reading this ever confuses business owners and landbastards hatred of taxes with a moral position.

They just don't think it should apply to them.

I think its because we're only just now coming to terms with the fact that we're simply a collection of desires, the culture we were born to and stories we tell ourselves. In keeping, we had to have a story to tell ourselves and free will existing is the more compelling of the two.

I don't think there's an evolutionary purpose. To me, we just became far more self aware than our limited knowledge of the world we find ourself in could cope with and its more of a coping mechanism than anything else.

I seem to remember that the common concensus is that it would be easier to create a whole universe than the individual simulation model.

Na, his policies were nothing close to definitive on any positions. Honestly, that part of the left has been fighting the far right so long that they've lost track of where the lines are supposed to be and just lie as policy.

Well known by who? Where are these people? Are they in the room with us right now?

There isn't anything to corroborate that he was ever either one of those, let alone switched. The people who didn't want him to win the leadership simply declared it to be thus and such. Despite their claims, that not the same thing as it being true.

The "he switch after he won the leadership" is the part they made up. You have to realise that the label of neoliberal was given to him not only by his enemies within the party but by people who also don't actually know anything at all about neoclassical economics and simply use the term as a slur to throw at anyone right of the socialist campaign group that they dont like. In fact, the term has all but lost its meaning due to them.

You'd have thought that there was something in-between being a socialist and a neoliberal but, Apparently, were to beleive thats not the case.

The problem is presuming someone needs incentive or malice to do that. The guy was soft-left and known to be so for years, right up until the very second he ran in the leadership election against corbyns heir Rebecca Long Bailey. At that exact moment, as if by magic, he became a neoliberal.

Its almost as if people made it up.

Its missleading to bass too much on that analysis. The parties don't compete for the popular vote but to concentrate votes within seats they feel they can win.

No one was aiming to win the popular vote. I agree that's a problem but we can't really read to much into the split imo.

While not the commandments of course, the bible does state that a man who lays with a boy, the way he lays with a woman, should be killed. Of course again, the church perverted this meaning to make out that being gay was outlawed by the Bible, specifically at the expense of not being allowed to rape little boys.........

Crypto bros who follow ultra distorted stoicism (the only good philosophy is the ones made when slavery was normalised) that believe everyone else is unaware of what very basic knowledge they world they just learned that day.