SSOTT

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by chris719

Eh, I don't know, maybe. It seems like a lot for something that isn't broken at the moment, IMO.

Online egalitarianism is most certainly broken - some jackoff VP sitting 2 blocks away from me right now has the power to instantly & immediately shutoff primary comms channels of entire governments with no proces, no review, no remedy. If you're wondering why Merkel said a ban is "problematic" that's why. French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire called the ban "one of the threats" to democracy. And let's not forget ISPs now have that same power. Corporations, and especially some 30something tech VP, should not have that power, period. It's an existential threat to democracy.

[GrussGott]

Sunset Over the Santa Cruz Mountains tonight - pic doesn't do it justice, it was very mom's-geezus-picture:

[minn19]

Shocker, Pence wussed out.

When the political section was open, I said in the impeachment thread McConnell should've used his chance to get rid of Trump then (of course the usual gang said I was an idiot etc). Now he supposedly wants to after he has lost everything to try and save the GOP's future from Trumpism? Good luck, might be too late..........

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by minn19

Now he supposedly wants to after he has lost everything to try and save the GOP's future from Trumpism? Good luck, might be too late..........

Yup - hey so what's the consensus on dealing with relatives who send you Trumpkin emails? Ignore it? Polite but firm I'm-not-a-seditionist? I"m thinking just ignore them as long as they're not repeated.

On another note:

"If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."
-- Ulysses S. Grant

[minn19]

And now McConnell does what McConnell does best for his final act.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Yup - hey so what's the consensus on dealing with relatives who send you Trumpkin emails? Ignore it? Polite but firm I'm-not-a-seditionist? I"m thinking just ignore them as long as they're not repeated.

On another note:

"If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."
-- Ulysses S. Grant

I have ignored my Dad on the subject except once he said Trump showed us that Covid was no big deal. When I asked him if Marine One was going to pick us up on our front lawn and take us to a hospital to receive the best 24/7 care in the world plus experimental/cutting edge drugs/treatments...........he didn’t respond and hasn’t brought up anything Trumpy since.

[minn19]

Happier news, after two months off, my daughters team has a hockey tournament tomorrow. I get to fill on the bench, we are all really excited to get back at it.

[GrussGott]

Leslie Jones asking some legit questions about what exactly is going on back there

[chris719]

It's a Q drop! The cat means that the Lincoln Project is in on it and Rick Wilson is a True Patriot.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Leslie Jones asking some legit questions about what exactly is going on back there

What the?

[GrussGott]

Just to get an economics reality point out there: "but the US standard of living has gone up in the last few decades, mine has!" - no it hasn't (on average), but here's why it seems to:

* Let's say a 1975 decent level of stuff cost $100k in 2021 $

* Where would that 1975 stuff have been made, by whom, and how much are they paid? Mostly in the US, by US workers, being paid middle class wages e.g, Anchor Hocking glassware, made in Ohio, at the Anchor Hocking plant, by workers getting paid ~$60k in 2021 $, and that goes for all of the workers in the whole AH supply chain.

* In 2021, same questions: In China or SE Asia, by Chinese workers, getting paid 3rd world wages, including the whole supply chain.

* So that means that same $100k of stuff now only costs about $30k so you can buy twice as much stuff even if your pay didn't increase a nickel! (adj for inflation of course)

* But wait, what's wrong with that? Sure US workers aren't making more - most less in fact - but even so they have equal or more stuff so who cares? It's all good!

* Yeah, but where did all that margin/profit go from the goods arbitrage? To the owners of retailer, i.e., the 1%. So basically foreign supply chains / global trade created a massive wealth shift from workers to investors, i.e, from labor to capital

* Well no biggie because *I've* been doing well / have a lot of real estate / have a great job, right? Wrong.

Our economy - right now - is like a video game (or Monopoly) where each player tries to consume all of the resources and, the more they consume, the easy it becomes to consume more and the harder it becomes for other players to consume ANY resources. That's the same here - eventually those few with all the resources only need YOU to serve THEM; and your job or real estate only has value if it has value TO THEM, because they have a majority of the resources! In short, you become an indentured servant to those with capital since they can wipe out your wealth with a finger snap (or your means to communicate?).

Anyway, all this is to say, yes, average US worker living standard has been static since the 70s, but average investor lifestyle has been J-curving since the 70s as the profits from global trade get shifted to them.


Indulging myself, here's a neat snippet from a 2018 Pew Research Note:

After adjusting for inflation, however, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power it did in 1978, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 had the same purchasing power that $23.68 would today.

Ok so that last line is interesting, because let's also look at a Congressional Report updated December 28, 2020 of wages 1979-2019:



Note that the median 2019 all occupations hourly wage is $19.14, which is less than Pew's $23.68 peak average hourly wage from 1973.

So where'd those profits go?



The top 90% which is probably all of us here ... but we all need to remember that unless something major changes, the top 90% will shrink to the top 95%, then top 98%, then top 99.5% as the winners consume all of the resources (i.e., capital)

What's it all mean?

Maximize your liquid capital, invest broadly and voraciously.

[GrussGott]

American Thinker releases statement today:

"Hey you know that thing that's in our title: "thinking"? Well, it turns out we don't ever do that"

[GrussGott]

Norm MacDonald as mob guy is the best!

[GrussGott]

Completely obvious observation (I guess):

All of these Q/Trumpkins/Stomers are just a big internet forum where they all got to be friends, share community & belonging, and slowly share larger and larger conspiracies ... and then it all got so out of hand some of them ended up in a big LARP convention & being 90% of the capitol seditionists ... with the other 10% actual hardened criminals and/or foreign agents.

If and when the full story comes out, it's going to end up being the greatest PsyOp ever perpetrated against ANY country, and unfortunately didn't need much help from foreign actors other than flame-fanning.

I say this because as I read and hear from actual people involved they truly believed this was like some big convention "over there" and then they'd come home and be normal. They're truly flabbergasted there might be consequences - they're at the "geez, maybe I should delete all the evidence on my phone" stage.

They truly don't get they jeopardized the foundations of their lives and of the US. They're just barely waking up to maybe this was, like, a pretty serious thing. Like a bank robber who's like, "whoa you mean like jail jail illegal?? should I hide this money??" really!

They really and truly see this as a live-action role playing thing, not a crimes-against-democracy thing.

I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

Are internet forums way more subconsciously dangerous than we ever thought? I'm starting to think deleting the politics sub-forum here was a genius move ...

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Yup - hey so what's the consensus on dealing with relatives who send you Trumpkin emails? Ignore it? Polite but firm I'm-not-a-seditionist? I"m thinking just ignore them as long as they're not repeated.

On another note:

"If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."
-- Ulysses S. Grant

Reminds me of another quote:

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
Isaac Asimov

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Completely obvious observation (I guess):

All of these Q/Trumpkins/Stomers are just a big internet forum where they all got to be friends, share community & belonging, and slowly share larger and larger conspiracies ... and then it all got so out of hand some of them ended up in a big LARP convention & being 90% of the capitol seditionists ... with the other 10% actual hardened criminals and/or foreign agents.

If and when the full story comes out, it's going to end up being the greatest PsyOp ever perpetrated against ANY country, and unfortunately didn't need much help from foreign actors other than flame-fanning.

I say this because as I read and hear from actual people involved they truly believed this was like some big convention "over there" and then they'd come home and be normal. They're truly flabbergasted there might be consequences - they're at the "geez, maybe I should delete all the evidence on my phone" stage.

They truly don't get they jeopardized the foundations of their lives and of the US. They're just barely waking up to maybe this was, like, a pretty serious thing. Like a bank robber who's like, "whoa you mean like jail jail illegal?? should I hide this money??" really!

They really and truly see this as a live-action role playing thing, not a crimes-against-democracy thing.

I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

Are internet forums way more subconsciously dangerous than we ever thought? I'm starting to think deleting the politics sub-forum here was a genius move ...

It’s made me truly think we need to look at curtailing certain things that are now considered free speech. People are a lot more stupid (and hateful etc etc) than I ever dreamed in this country unfortunately.

[chris719]

People radicalize each other on forums. I mean, before the politics sub was deleted there was a thread where a popular member was going on and on about saving the children from sex trafficking. He claimed to not know or not knowingly be repeating Q sources, except he clearly was. This kind of shit is affecting highly educated people. I am sure the people that are most vulnerable to this shit have deficiencies in their critical thinking skills, but that's not really comforting given the number of people affected and the positions that some have risen to.


It's not just a right-wing issue; just look at anti-vaxxers, who now span all political ideologies. In order to keep our so-called advanced civilized society, we really do need to stamp this stuff out and drive it to dark corners. Crazies are engaged, and engagement drives social media algorithms, creating positive feedback.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by chris719

People radicalize each other on forums. I mean, before the politics sub was deleted there was a thread where a popular member was going on and on about saving the children from sex trafficking. He claimed to not know or not knowingly be repeating Q sources, except he clearly was. This kind of shit is affecting highly educated people. I am sure the people that are most vulnerable to this shit have deficiencies in their critical thinking skills, but that's not really comforting given the number of people affected and the positions that some have risen to.


It's not just a right-wing issue; just look at anti-vaxxers, who now span all political ideologies. In order to keep our so-called advanced civilized society, we really do need to stamp this stuff out and drive it to dark corners. Crazies are engaged, and engagement drives social media algorithms, creating positive feedback.

Who? Not Gonzo. He likes a lot of stupid conspiracies, but I don't think Q was one of them. The guy who kept posting the Alex Jones videos?

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Who? Not Gonzo. He likes a lot of stupid conspiracies, but I don't think Q was one of them. The guy who kept posting the Alex Jones videos?

I'll PM you, I'd rather not post names and draw even more attention to Central/South America . It was just one thread that got deleted, but it was amusing.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by chris719

I'll PM you, I'd rather not post names and draw even more attention to Central/South America . It was just one thread that got deleted, but it was amusing.

If I can get vaccinated in time, I may be going to Central America.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by minn19

It’s made me truly think we need to look at curtailing certain things that are now considered free speech. People are a lot more stupid (and hateful etc etc) than I ever dreamed in this country unfortunately.

Well, I think we need to start with the fact that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issues broadcast licenses to radio and television stations that operate in the "public interest, convenience and necessity"

In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” Generally, this means it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license

In 1949, the FCC issued a report that established the duty of broadcast licensees to cover controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. That obligation was termed the Fairness Doctrine, and it heavily impacted radio and TV, but it was sort of repealed (or started to be) in 1987.

A Congressional Report on the The Fairness Doctrine says that basically licensees must

"devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance" and "affirmatively endeavor to make ... facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues"

and that

"In practice, it required broadcasters to identify issues of public importance, decide to cover those issues, and then to afford the best representatives of the opposing views on the issue the opportunity to present their case to the community"

The Fairness Doctrine was always controversial for being burdensome and for possibly impacting free speech ... plus it didn't apply to / wouldn't apply to cable TV or pay services - that same report says:

"distinct from cable, satellite, and the Internet, which are all services for which consumers must pay ... It does not appear that the Fairness Doctrine may be applied constitutionally to cable or satellite service providers"

In short, it's a bit murky, but I agree with you and I think if we brought back an amended form of The Fairness Doctrine AND amended Section 230 it would mostly take care of the problem.

Apparently deplatforming loud sources of mis- and disinformation has already been working wonders:

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Well, I think we need to start with the fact that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issues broadcast licenses to radio and television stations that operate in the "public interest, convenience and necessity"

In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” Generally, this means it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license

In 1949, the FCC issued a report that established the duty of broadcast licensees to cover controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. That obligation was termed the Fairness Doctrine, and it heavily impacted radio and TV, but it was sort of repealed (or started to be) in 1987.

A Congressional Report on the The Fairness Doctrine says that basically licensees must

"devote a reasonable portion of broadcast time to the discussion and consideration of controversial issues of public importance" and "affirmatively endeavor to make ... facilities available for the expression of contrasting viewpoints held by responsible elements with respect to the controversial issues"

and that

"In practice, it required broadcasters to identify issues of public importance, decide to cover those issues, and then to afford the best representatives of the opposing views on the issue the opportunity to present their case to the community"

The Fairness Doctrine was always controversial for being burdensome and for possibly impacting free speech ... plus it didn't apply to / wouldn't apply to cable TV or pay services - that same report says:

"distinct from cable, satellite, and the Internet, which are all services for which consumers must pay ... It does not appear that the Fairness Doctrine may be applied constitutionally to cable or satellite service providers"

In short, it's a bit murky, but I agree with you and I think if we brought back an amended form of The Fairness Doctrine AND amended Section 230 it would mostly take care of the problem.

Apparently deplatforming loud sources of mis- and disinformation has already been working wonders:

I know it may be extremely hard (maybe impossible/unconstitutional) to do, but the things you are saying plus what the British do with their media would be a good thing.

It’s obviously not good to allow an unbelievable amount of disinformation sources across tv/internet and of course radio 24/7 365 days a year. To me, it is akin to constantly screaming fire in a crowded theater every second of the day.