The FBI, headed by Kash Patel? The FBI, an organization recently purged of people deemed disloyal to Trump? That FBI? Forgive me if I don't see a difference between the FBI labeling it terrorism and Trump/Musk doing it, its all the same thing. Vandalism is not Terrorism, however, repeatedly calling vandalism terrorism as a justification to allow black bagging or deportation (without typical due process) of someone who spray painted some cars sounds a lot like fascistic propaganda to me.
When I was twelve I got caught tagging an abandoned building, I was prosecuted for this and had to pay a fine and attend diversion. Sounds like you think a more appropriate punishment would have been for me to be branded as a terrorist and shipped out of country.
Interesting the way you framed this. Especially the part about liberals doing the beatings and threatening more of them.
One party had a message and large portion of it's voter base focused on messages and policies that can only be described as hateful and harmful. Now that it seems like that harm is transpiring and surprise surprise just as the "we don't give two shits about you" liberals warned that harm is at best indiscriminate and at worst going to impact those spiteful voters the most.
Trump is doing exactly what he said he'd do, tariff all the things, these people proudly and loudly voted for the (self-inflicted) punishment you're describing.
If your world view is one where the most important thing is the share price, agreed. In terms of providing value to their customers I'm less convinced day by day. In terms of consistently providing quality content, Netflix has absolutely fallen off a cliff in putting out well made, well written movies or series. They also seem to be amongst the worst in the industry in on cancelling series, to the point that often times they will announce the cancellation within weeks of a series release, which I guess is good if you want to know which shows not to bother with, though in general you probably shouldn't bother with any of them.
> Ultimately, the biggest price is paid by those on the bottom, with the least power.
What price specifically has or is being paid by those in the U.S. with the least power? That price whatever it is, is 100% due to U.S. foreign policy decisions? It's really not clear to me how decades of mostly stable global relations has concretely hurt the average American. Their wages have been depressed by domestic capitalism. The lack of housing can be largely attributed to bad local and domestic policy. The cost of groceries if anything are as low as they are because of global trade, not in spite of it. These are the things I hear people concerned about, I don't think I've ever in my life heard an average person express the sentiment that everything would just be better if we fucked over all our allies.
The existence of content doesn't mean you need to engage with it. If these types of questions or discussion are superfluous in your mind you can always choose to ignore them instead of jumping in. Conversations and questions about the article and its impact seems on-topic in this context, joining the discussion simply to chastise people for participating in the discourse does not feel on-topic to me.
I personally think there is value in discussion around first-in-my-lifetime events like this.
When? At what specific (magic) number does everything come crumbling down? We're at ~36 Trillion today, would 37 Trillion the number that will cause people to run out of faith? I mean that's only one more than we have today, surely people won't run out of faith for one more. So maybe it's 40 Trillion? But come on, we're at 36, people can't possibly give up on the US dollar just an 8% increase. How about 100 Trillion? 500 Trillion? I'm not sure you know how this game is played.
I'm not just talking about US citizens, by the way. Foreign alliances are forming to dethrone the dollar as we speak. It will not last forever. I didn't say it would come crumbling down overnight. It will be a gradually shift away from the dollar. To believe the dollar is invincible is incredibly naive.
Why wait to spend that (magic) money at all then? What is the point of setting an annual budget? Earmarking contracts out for all these organizations by little million increments every year seems illogical when you can literally just put a few trillion in their hands today.
Why not spend all 500 trillion today? What are we waiting for?
I am entirely certain you do not believe in your own position.
why not maintain proper accounting? the deficit and enormous debt is a symptom of spending more than we have here, so much more we have to get money from other countries. you can’t do this forever. so what, spend until when? this question has come up repeatedly in the past and i’ve never seen it answered. Where’s the line where those wanting more taxes and deficit switch? How much would taxes and the debt have to be for you to say “this is out of control”?
A bit laughable to accuse someone of being misinformed and them point them at a bullshit machine for answers.
You might want to consider reading/learning from some primary sources instead of basing your entire perception of reality on hallucinations from chatbots and Fox News.
You can run the Go compiled wasm binary through wasm-opt (https://github.com/WebAssembly/binaryen) and it will decrease the size and give back some of the performance lost by using the standard go compiler over TinyGo. Fair warning it's pretty slow, and fun fact tinygo passes it's wasm files through wasm-opt which is why the tinygo compilation feels especially slow, I believe this can possibly be disabled via flag.
- Part of government is the legal system which a Judge's whole thing is being endless nuanced in understanding and applying what the law means; I would not considered this constricted robot like behavior even though the law is literally a bunch of written down rules.
- Part of government is funding research that involves people doing real experiments collecting real data? Are novel experiments those of constricted robots or LLMs?
- Part of government are the dedicated every day folks who are doing the best they can despite being overworked and under resourced who have to make life and death decisions in the moment every day (air traffic controllers), who monitor and coordinate relief and management of disasters big and small in a very interconnected world (we just had a global pandemic, are culling record numbers of chickens, had a bad hurricane season, and large wildfires) these are not people behaving like robots they are just people following laws and regulations primarily passed via efforts of lobbyists, or else are those that are written in blood.
Don't like the way a part of government works? Reform it. Don't try to burn the whole thing to the ground by doing shit like emailing the people responsible for keeping planes from crashing into each other that if they want to they can fuck off for the next 8 months on the tax-payers dime and then find a new low-stress job. Don't like certain regulations or the ways laws are weaponized against everyone but corporations and the wealthy? I get it, me neither I'd like to see affordable housing too. Unfortunately, congress has the responsibility to fix that, not Donald Trump, not Elon Musk, nor any of his former SpaceX interns. If they want to make those changes they should get elected to congress or hell maybe for shits and giggles use some of that lobbying money for the common good they claim to care so much about.
> Don't like the way a part of government works? Reform it.
at what point does that become disingenuous? how many years have people bern trying to do it incrementally? just tell the reformer: oh try harder, knowing every feature of the bureaucracy is stacked against them and they wont succeed. in the meantime people are hurt, dollars are wasted.
> Unfortunately, congress has the responsibility to fix that,
that's not correct. congress has ceded execution of these things to the executive in many cases with broad leeway to do or not do (thats why it's called discretionary spending, any spending that is by law congress' responsibility is statutory spending)
You are mistaken. Discretionary spending is spending that Congress allocates during the annual appropriation process, while mandatory spending is spending that is required by prior law. See https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder...
When I was twelve I got caught tagging an abandoned building, I was prosecuted for this and had to pay a fine and attend diversion. Sounds like you think a more appropriate punishment would have been for me to be branded as a terrorist and shipped out of country.
reply