The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
"In essence, the threats were related to getting the music off the Internet or they were going to kill her," police spokesman Sgt. Rick Martinez said. "We can't validate how serious they are, but we do take it seriously."
Uh huh. In any case, a death threat from the other side of the globe generally isn't serious unless someone like Vladimir Putin is sending it. And it's not "bullying".
His "shenanigans" were perfectly legal. He put stock purchased with post-tax money in the Roth, it went up (bigly), he doesn't pay taxes on the gains. I wouldn't put it past a Democratic administration to reneg on Roths (either for him or generally), however.
If only. There's precious little "dum vivimus vivamus" today.
God knows people like Rebecca Black were bullied horrifically by people she'd never met on the other side of the globe
Nobody on the other side of the globe that Rebecca Black did not know bullied her "horrifically". They may have said bad things about her, but that's not the same thing.
I don't know about cocoa, but the meat increases are mostly about supply; the US cattle herd is at its lowest level since 1951.
Just remember that meat eating is bad, so pricing beef out of the range of ordinary people is all for the greater good in the long term.
I expect thinking like that in the Biden administration is the big reason for the increase (keeping in mind the market is global). It's very easy to make policies which increase the price of things. And even if Trump has found and removed them, it takes years to grow cattle for market.
But ground beef in my area is about $6.00/lb for 80% lean.
Eggs are about where they were 10 years ago. Rice is 46% higher. Beans are 21% higher. Milk is 35% higher. Flour is 2.6% higher. Ground beef is up 85% -- that's the big one.
What I remember about Cecil is the doctor who shot him totally being dragged for it, but a few people interviewed some Africans and they were like "Lions? They suck, dude. They eat my friends. Americans will kill them and pay us for the privilege? Cool!" (OK, not in those exact words)
I don't think Cleveland is obscure enough for the montage anyway; he's gotten some slight recent attention for being the first president with discontinuous terms. The guy in the middle (Benjamin Harrison) counts, though.
There's talk in the main thread about the Trump $250. I think we do need some larger bills. I'd suggest Nixon rather than Trump. Not only is he properly deceased, since many of our bills have a building on the reverse, it designs itself: The Watergate Hotel.
My wife suggests we have a bill containing a montage of some of the more obscure Presidents -- Tyler, Taylor, Polk, etc. She also thought we should put some women on. Obviously Susan Anthony and some of the others are way overdone. We came up with Sally Ride (the astronaut), and Carrie Nation -- presumably the front would be her famous hatchet pic, and the back would depict a busted-up saloon.
They only do that if you attempt to interact with them in any way.
There isn’t really comparable real estate.
I mentioned several areas with comparable real estate (parts of Jersey City, Hoboken, Weehawken) -- these are not small towns where you need a car, they are dense cities. As for the outer suburbs, they're not $2M you can get that for $1M easy; my own house in an Essex County suburb is probably $750K.
Suburban Westchester is another story, not only is it more expensive but it has the whole of Upper Manhattan, the Bronx, and Yonkers (technically in Westchester) between it and the commercial centers of Manhattan.
The left holds both power and legitimacy. Its dictates will be obeyed voluntarily by all but parts of the executive branch of the Federal Government, while that branch is treated as if it were an outlaw. The people do not back up the Feds under Trump, nor do the courts, nor do the states. They do not have legitimacy; their opponents do. Only the left can govern in America because the right will (mostly) accept the left's legitimacy when they win (yes, even after 2020) while the left simply will not accept the right's in any case.
No, he's just, like 80% of men, ugly in the eyes of women.
I expect the wells were placed where there was the most methane.
Goldman Sachs in fact did relocate a lot of its less-prestigious jobs to Jersey City.
By contrast the residential real estate dynamics are different because of zoning. A lot of housing around cheap suburban office parks on Long Island is super expensive because it’s single family zoned for wealthy PMC in the burbs of one of the richest cities in the world.
There's plenty of dense-zoned land on the New Jersey side. Even the more desirable stuff (Hoboken, Paulus Hook, Grove Street, Weehawken) is far less desirable than Manhattan or close-in parts of Brooklyn and Queens, possibly because young single women simply won't cross the Hudson for any reason. The less desirable stuff is less desirable for the usual reasons.
You get something greater than the effect of "miniquakes" (magnitude 1 or less) when a large truck drives by. And the stories about methane in water supply were fraudulent; the methane was there before the fracking.
Take a look at what is happening in Newark. The left is physically attacking DHS agents, and DHS can do nothing about it because neither the state nor the Federal District of New Jersey will back them up. They're reduced to dumb ideas like ending all sanctuary city international flights (which would be enjoined by said judges anyway). Even when the right holds the formal titles, the left continues to hold power and legitimacy. The left is a juggernaut.
You can, temporarily, in a few places, do a thing. But the backlash for you winning any political power (whether you do anything with it or not) will allow them to take over, permanently, and erase your gains.
The argument that both you and @ThisIsSin are making would appear to endorse "the heckler's veto" and by extension the idea that "might makes right".
Whether might makes right or not, it is still might. I am not discussing what "we" should do; I am discussing what "we" can do.
I reject this argument on the basis that each and everyone of us is (presumably at least) a human being with free will, and as such may choose to refuse their demands at any time.
Whatever the demand, you can refuse, and they can punish you until you are compliant, dead, or irrelevant.
Most of the points are reasonable
Yes, the unreasonableness was advanced one seemingly reasonable point at a time.
They have sufficient power to demand the privilege.
You can sanewash it all you want, though the fact that you were able to come up with an 11-point list without much trouble kinda works against you.
And are you seriously saying that a group of 10 year-olds cannot play alone outside without it being called child abuse?
It's quite possible this will get the police and/or CPS called. Even if it doesn't, if something happens with one of these 10 year olds -- e.g. one or more gets a minor injury, or they trespass on the wrong neighbor's lawn -- the parents will be questioned about why they weren't supervising the child. And with that sort of question, there's no acceptable answer; the question is simply making the point that there was a transgression.
- Prev
- Next

The problem with Argentina is the same as with the rest of Latin America... they always keep going back to commies.
More options
Context Copy link