georgioz
2hr ago
If you will live around this type of Democrat then that you will also get Muslim immigrant as well as ruined school, criminals and the rest of it. It is a package deal and it is literally what happened over in Michigan and why there is a Muslim candidate in the first place.
georgioz
3hr ago
This is aged old tactics of fake sympathy where you blur the difference between jab and reality, maintaining plausible deniability. It can be something like "I'd never buy Toyota Camry given how it breaks down every other week leaving John stranded and missing work". You just plant this idea in people's mind making it acceptable to talk about at least in this indirect manner.
georgioz
3hr ago
How does one waste four months of investigation on this? And why is no one terrified that the cops are now involved in a plagiarism scandal? How does it even occur to this guy to call the cops on this issue and be right to do so?
If I was police investigator, I would do my best to investigate this for at least couple of months covering my bases. We are talking about prominent minority scholar who feels threatened by a racist. This reeks of huge problems where Guardian and the like will pour through results of investigation to find even hint of investigators showing their racial bias not investigating it properly.
I've asked her many times and she can't explain it. Like for example, if I make sexual jokes to her about Anna from Frozen, she gives me the look. But when the actress in the Frozen Broadway musical takes the character in a totally sexual direction, and makes throaty murmers and feels up a suit of armor while singing "The First Time in Forever" (yes this actually happens in the taped produced movie of the Frozen musical that is currently on Disney+, go see for yourself), she gets annoyed if I think it's a little weird for a kids production to feature that.
It makes sense if you acknowledge the late-stage feminism main normie message: feminism is whatever women do. The idea is that women cannot be judged for almost anything, if women do it then it is expression of their feminism and empowerment. There exist a huge carveout out of this if women do adopt more conservative stances. So if women are against abortion then of course it is not feminism, but false consciousness and internal misogyny and we do not talk about it maybe except that they are victims of their for sure terrible and abusive husbands. But in general any degenerate thing that women do should not be judged, it is just expression of feminist empowerment. At worst they had to be forced to do it by men.
So sorry to break it to you, but you sexualizing Disney princess is disgusting, your wife sexualizing the same princess is feminism. And do not dare to judge her or ask her to maintain any level of moral consistency or ask her to fulfill any moral duty. It is as simple as that.
The jury came up with the final number, they could have said it is $100k per family. Claimants originally asked for $550 million - a dollar for each view of the video. Why a dollar? Because it is nice number, there is no history behind it, there is no calculation or anything. It just sounds nice and reasonable. This is by the way a common practice in jury system, where you provide a psychological anchor for jury, so you massage them toward maximum payout.
The jury then just said - fuck it, Jones will pay almost three times that number, because why not? He is a stupid evil goblin. Or maybe it was something else and jury came up with some novel idea of how to calculate these punitive damages as $2.54 per view, or maybe they used a different key. We will never know because jury does not have to explain shit.
Sympathetic victims, goblin perpetrator who is crazy enough not to even defend properly and good jury is what is key to get class defining payout. By the way the verdict also stipulates that 50% of Jones income is to be transferred to victims indefinitely despite not even being sentenced for criminal activity without ability to go bankrupt. So he became something akin to debt slave by this. That is exactly how the jury system works.
One of the Anglo things that is commonly criticized in continental Europe is the judicial system. The complaint is usually formulated as "I wouldn't want to delegate the question of guilt to twelve randos that have no understanding of the law".
This is strawman of the position that it brings laicism into the law. But it is not only about understanding, it brings whole new baggage. There are things like emotional appeals and courtroom theater, there are issues with outside influences by pressure campaigns or even threats to jurors who did not select this as a career. There are issues with tribalism where jury plays favorites, there is a reason why Jim Crow juries is a term. Who knows how jury system will work in Somali communities. There is of course other stuff, we are far from 18th century and juries are there to decide complex fraud schemes, patent litigation and other stuff. It is not just about stealing groceries.
The biggest bonus is ability to insert local values, however this also works against you. If you are known in community as fraudster by hearsay, then good luck. The biggest advantage is extra check on judiciary corruption, however it is also double edged sword as there is no written deliberation of their verdicts and it introduces system uncertainty. This also provides incentive toward frivolous litigation - what if you randomly get a "good jury" and make some free money? Even better if you strike gold and you are sympathetic victim against nameless corporation or goblin like Alex Jones, then you can get 1.4 billion in damages for defamation, basically using the judicial system as class defining wealth transfer.
Average gross margins for grocery stores in NYC is 1,6% on total revenue of around $50 billion a year. The proposed stores should offer unachievable 30% discount with revenue of around $50 million, one thousandth of overall grocery store market volume. It cannot work for a problem at hand, it is not designed to do it.
If he is smart, then he will offer some selected number of discounted goods with limited volume per person as with normal shops, who use this promo tactic to attract buyers. He can then make photo ops of happy customers, while the rest of the store will be competitively priced in order to prevent empty shelves and related PR disaster. It will work splendidly for the main purpose: generate positive PR and reward people in his circle who will be involved in this money hog.
georgioz
6d ago
I think this is just equivocation of the word ambition. It is not only "I want things", it also means possessing relevant character traits like: goal and result orientation, task ownership, ability to face adversity with grit etc. Ambition does not mean a porn addict lump who wants to have lambo in a year with this new system to win in blackjack or trading.
But maybe I am wrong and you actually have ambitious people in your office who bust their asses, ask for tasks, chase their goals like crazy etc. Only they are bad at it because they are stupid and unqualified.
You will not be around these "pleasant" people for long, because they will suicidally turn your neighborhood into a shithole and then possibly move away from you to do damage elsewhere. It is false dilemma such as saying you don't like pitbulls roaming the streets and breeding, but you do not mind living next to neighbors who feed and protect them, because they are nice animal loving people and they mean well.
More options
Context Copy link