tiziniano

Ok, just 'member all winner's had to play.

What is this fantasy? revenge porn fanfic?

Lo, n behold, yet another example of the average American obsession with "looks".

Still, little content to these claims including the one above.

Not to be a grammar nazi, but I fail to see how this sentence works "The capitol was assaulted in order to prevent the democratically elected president." On an emotional level, I can see how you see it as a threat to your illusions. Someone was trying to prevent your president from existing. It does sound scary and fits in line with the gnostic thought pervading the American left. "The world is broken, but we will fix it, and it will be not broken then." (Cue the unicorns...)

Now, addressing the actual proposition (short of an argument): Where was the "actual insurrection" and where is the evidence for "attempted assassinations" and "theft/sale of national secrets". I'm not a lawyer and certainly not in your jurisdiction, but it is apparent that you possess evidence of these three things. Hence, I urge you to contact the appropriate law enforcement and share your findings.

Don't be so emotional, they were only taking your illusion of them.

Look into the burning of the Reichstag...

Of course free markets cannot solve all problems. And neither can socialism or communism or any -ism. A lot of pain would be avoided if people just minded their own problems and their immediate environment's. Alas, never the case

How long were the trials? I recall a famous drug that was given in the 70s and it produced birth malformations. Took years for doctors to realize the cause and ban its use in pregnant women. Is there a possibility of unforeseen consequences from using RNA? What if someone has for XYZ reason more reverse transcriptase than usual? Will his-her DNA be altered?

Doesn't the actual election happen later? If I recall in 2000, they had some trouble until December with Al Gore.

Voting in the USA is such a joke for it being a first world country. One would expect blockchain based systems or at least a cryptographically based system to exist. The fact that they don't even have a national voter ID. Like seriously how much does it cost to have one and give it for free to every person? Poorer countries have done so with more success. The calls arguing voter suppression are the dumbest, if you are not smart enough to get a card and vote, then maybe that vote should not count.

Do not be mistaken, popular vote was one of the options considered at the beginning of the USA. It was not due to the potential for fraud. So even today, the electoral college serves as a safeguard when there is reason to believe the popular vote has been tainted. The current media narrative is there is no hard evidence, but what other evidence other than video, sworn affidavits is required? Do not be too quick to call it for Biden, not withstanding the popular vote, this probably will drag on until December despite the media attempts to end it quickly.

It is an option, but remember something that the Democrat party was talking about in 2016... a global tax. Prediction, that will make a big comeback under Biden

After the l4ptop from hell was exposed, we can see he does not care for much other than continuing to enrich his family. There certainly will be new directions towards China, Middle east

Of course it matters: If there is an income tax increase, if COVID lockdowns are renewed or imposed on a more federal level, if the US ceases to be a net exporter of oil, if the tariffs with China are suspended, they will go down.

Broader tendency for sure, look at the Alexandra Ocasio tweet asking for a list of Trump "enablers". The future is scary

Yeah, imagine someone did this to Obama or the Clinton Foundation.... The mediatic outrage would be unmeasurable

Better show tax loss and not pay taxes on it.

Exactly, even though the economies of scale were making the economic value of the company much higher, this extra will just keep disproportionately going to the shareholders. In fact, the bigger the companies, the more power they hold in wage negotiations. Think about an efficient market with many, many buyers and sellers. What kind of equilibrium does it reach? Now think of a few big companies, hiring from an ever increasing supply. The companies grow bigger, but the wage that laborers receive, will decrease. At some point it becomes this question, why should American workers give up an ever bigger part of their wage to shareholders and other immigrants?

In spite of their best efforts, most of the software development still occurs in the US. Think Microsoft hasn't tried to offshore as much as possible to India and China, building dev centers there? Or Google and FB?

Even then, just look at what kind of workers end up being imported through this programs. Not always the best and brightest. Many do entry level jobs not even in software development, for outsourcing companies.

I'm not saying outright ban immigration but better control is needed. (And saying this as a non-American living in the US). Something that struck me as particularly interesting and President Trump recently commented, is how about making companies bid for a fixed number of visa slots. Whoever pays the highest salary, gets the visa. This would certainly make companies be able to bring the brightest, while raising wages in general.

I mean it is economics 101 that H1B's depress wages. I'd say especially since the demand for technology is relatively more inelastic that the increases on labor supply. There is a lot of money involved in masking this fact, but let's agree on something. There is always a tension between what part of economic surplus workers get and what part capital (shareholders) get. The sky high returns on capital in tech are possible in no big part due to the relative ease of bringing in new people. Successful companies will still make money but the actual return on the invesment will depend more on how high of a salary they have to pay. Take for instance FB, they make about 18Bn in net income, have 52K employees. About 350K per employee, imagine suddenly they were facing hiring engineers, they could easily spend a lot more on keeping them, but there's no need. Thanks to their lobbying through FWD.us among others, they can always import more people.

I mean they have desperately tried to get more people into CS, but even that has had little results. Biggest bang for the buck is lobbying and marketing for more H1Bs. What's a couple hundred million here and there

Who hurt you? Why discount their friendship? I'd say it would make little difference with people of the caliber of RBG or Scalia.

I mean I will take RBG's opinion over the unhinged mob's any day. If you admire her, why not try to understand why she defended him?

I mean they both seemed to have good sportsmanship. Is life not but a game?

What do you mean?

I think you hit it right on the head. What I'm wondering now is: What leads to this association of politics and identity? Is it a product of our culture, upbringing, is it human nature? Is it that modern life has so little avenue for people individuating? Maybe it is filling a void.

One thing that strikes me as key to this polarization is how pervasive are some generalizations we make today and how the individual is lost when we make them. I've seen racists make the comment "Black people are ...." (won't repeat that here) but then I see activist say "Black people are (ex. disadvantaged.)" Are there no quite privileged black people? (millionaires, billionaires, etc) Don't lower class people face a pretty similar set of challenges no matter their skin tone? When you look at it, both arguments are generalizing equally as aggressive. My question then is: are all generalizations wrong or only some?

I think this process of grouping people has ome currents of thought tend to generalize two aspects to it, people who group other people when making statements and people who in some search of uniqueness, group themselves into it? As a non-American, coming from a very heterogeneous country I find it hard to follow how many people will self-identify so readily with a group and in the process lose some of their individuality. Maybe I speak from "privilege" as someone who due to upbringing and origin, felt a quite distinct individual, so I cannot say for sure. I just think this currents of thought harm more by dividing into groups and with many individuals satisfying their need of identity there.

I'm not into speculation but your speculation about SA, says more about you than it might say of him.

Since we are into speculation now, it seems you dislike(d) SSC? What stopped you from expressing this opinion instead of pointing to another source? I'm actually interested in how the current cultural divide seems to be rooted in individual psychological traits, think this example might have some insight.

PS. I'd actually love to see some of these critics

Now now, that is a very charitable comment about its taste. As usual in food, more processing -> cheaper and lower quality. Sure, it might have similar macronutrients but real health is in getting enough micros.