Youtube comments of worn down (@worndown8280).
-
1200
-
808
-
774
-
573
-
552
-
355
-
341
-
296
-
295
-
293
-
269
-
197
-
171
-
170
-
147
-
144
-
134
-
130
-
118
-
114
-
112
-
110
-
109
-
100
-
96
-
93
-
91
-
90
-
88
-
86
-
86
-
85
-
85
-
84
-
In the span of 5 months, I broke my back, was medically discharged from the Marine Corps, my wife left me, I had to put my 16 year old dog down, then had the first of three back surgeries to repair the damage. Post surgery they made made me see a head shrink. Apparently I had significant severe depression.
I went through more than a few docs before I found a guy who was prior service and I asked him if it was a red flag if I had no really close friends. He said, do you want friends or do you think having friends will make you look or feel normal? I shockingly, to myself at least, I said no. He said then dont worry about it.
I think a lot of us feel this way. Maybe its to much damage, maybe its a form of emotional self preservation, or maybe its the result of a dysfunctional childhood from divorced parents who were never home. But in todays age, its not unnormal. But one should be careful not to become antisocial in your solace. We are still social animals.
84
-
81
-
79
-
77
-
75
-
72
-
71
-
70
-
69
-
67
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
63
-
61
-
61
-
59
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
54
-
53
-
51
-
50
-
49
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
He has the effect right. It perfectly explains the girl boss meme that women have actually tried to become. As a woman increases her status, she finds herself standing among a smaller and smaller pool of men she will find acceptable. So the writer is not wrong in that. The question is, how does one control that from a societal level, that underlying need for social standing and provision, that will make a woman feel that having offspring with a man is in her best interest?
Feminism unintentionally does this. Feminists like to say feminism is like giving a woman a box to stand on to be economically equal to men. But in reality its digging a ditch from which men MUST stand. That makes the men standing in those ditches much less economically attractive to women. And you can see this because in EVERY culture that women are empowered in, you have crashing birthrates, harsher marital laws to force men into compliance, and eventually the quitting of marriage by men and, in many nations, an epidemic of single motherhood.
I fully expect the return of bachelor taxes again to address the fertility issues, as if the issue is men. The modern woman has essentially defeated the male sex drive.
41
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
People wont like this answer. But like most things in life, time, will resolve this issue. When markets, any market, is forced and bent out of normal shape, it will always snap back to the baseline. By future altering it with laws and rules and taxes, that just adds additional layers of warpage that effect the market as a whole.
Most of these problems will resolve due to demography over the next decade. 2020 was always going to be the demand high point for housing. And then the Fed put rates in the toilet because of Covid. Give the market time to adjust back and this will resolve.
But no one wants to hear that. They want it now, and they want it their way. That means if they are a buyer they want home prices to drop as much as they can even if it causes a depression. If you are a seller or a boomer trying to live a decent life the last decade or two you have, you want your home to keep its value.
I can already hear the but what about the big institution buying all these homes. Yes, most of them wont make it through this recession. Most people are trying to pull assets from both the housing and commercial funds. Its not going to be pretty. The sad thing is that its going to be the public employee pensions that are going to be left holding the bag, again. repeat of 2008.
36
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
With your point on wokeness in gaming (and media at large) I think there has to something taken into consideration, the cost of money. Games, advertisements, television shows and movies are all made via banking. Every game studio, marketing firm, TV channel and movie studio gets loans from a bank to make a product.
Go back two years. What are the interest rates? Fed rate is 0. 25%. That means a lot of these things were being made at near free money. This goes back to 2008. So for this entire period you see a slow boil that steadily increases right up to 2020 where things go nuclear. Why? The lock downs. This was used as a thing to distract attention.
But the true believers dont understand that they were once again just useful idiots to further a more central cause. But now that make in the woke group are turning to bite the hands that fed them and the costs of feeding them, via interest rates has gone up, they are no longer a useful and expedient tool. They will be cast aside and ridiculed, the the anarchist left, until the next time they are needed for some societal anarchy to push whatever new agenda is needed to "progress".
But those games you were talking about that went woke and did ok, well they were all panned by gamers. None of them did as good as their predecessors. And thats why you are seeing studio after studio closing. So far in the last few months gaming studios around the US and Canada have fire close to 10k people. The truth is the gaming industry cannot afford to be woke anymore. It was always a luxury pushed by Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street.
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@BaldorfBreakdowns The stats people are citing you are from a study that found and massive disparity of the number of males vs the number of females who are having sex in younger demographic cohorts. And it is massive.
Womens numbers are steadily rising while mens have crashed more than 50 percent. That basicly women are having more sex, with fewer men. Now I dont think its as extreme as most say it is, "10 percent of men sleeping with 80 percent of women", but I think some may be conflating the studies and also surveys taken by women on dating websites that show that women find 80 percent of men non dateable. If they wont even date them will they even consider them for a sex partner, probably not no?
Multiple studies show this including one by Dr. Peter Ueda, a postdoctoral researcher at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden, the U.S. General Social Survey up until 2018. Meanwhile sex at middle age has utterly collapse. Single men and women, which there are more than ever due to divorce, are no longer mingling. And these stats are all up to 2018, so cant blame the coof. If you would like more studies, I would be more than happy to tell you them.
I totally understand why so many people would be uncomfortable with this data and the evidence it shows. Its damaging to both sides, for different reasons and will effect both men and women in completely different ways. I mean most people dont even see the demographic collapse thats about to happen. People dont understand whats coming.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Adam and Eve is borrowed from the Sumerian Eridu Genesis. The Torah reorders things. The first humans were eternal. The first humans helped the Sumerian gods. But they reproduced endlessly and were so noisy that the highest god, Enlil, cant sleep and requires his brother, Enki (the god of water, wisdom, and choas), to wipe the Earth clean so he could rest. Enki knowing his brother was rash and would later regret his choice took steps. Enki tells a righteous man, Utnapishtim, to build an ark, we literally have the clay tablets that have the lengths of materials needed to build it, to contain the animals so that when Enki sends the flood the animals will be saved. Utnapishtim is eternal. He does not die. But he boards the ark alone. The last survivor of the old men. He later appears in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
After the flood Enlil is upset and regretted his decision. While he is lamenting his decision, Enki gets together with two other Sumerian gods, this is where Genesis 1:26 comes from. The goddess envolved is named Nintu, which means rib in Sumerian and Enki keeps them in his garden. Eventually it gets back to Enlil that Enki has created more humans. Enlil enraged comes to Enki's home and demands Enki destroy the humans.
Enki tells Enlil not to worry. These humans do not live forever. They get sick, they die for like no reason at all. Enlil demands Enki cast them out of his garden. And Enki and Inanna gives Adam and Eve gift as they part. One of those gifts is a fruit of knowledge, but there were many more. And as the two humans leave the garden Enlil forces Enki to prostrate himself before the other Sumerian gods. Enki, the savior of the animals of the Earth. The creator of humans, is the snake in the Garden in the Torah. Enki's sigil is the caduceus.
He also appears in other parts of the Bible. He is the cause of the Tower of Babel incident.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
If you look at the trend line pre covid, housing for, even though it had a few cases of increase, was trending downward. There is no way our current price point can be supported without massive wage inflation, which employers cannot afford. So home prices will drop. And every year moving forward there will be less demand for housing. So while I think 5% drops per year will be normal going forward I do believe the first years will see larger drops.
And when I say demand I mean actual real demand, like a human being who needs a place to live, not investor demand. We will see a very sharp downturn once the layoffs start. The Fed is not going to pivot. People who think that are just not willing to accept that it is the lesser of the two evils facing us now.
As the boomers die, there will just not be the demand for homes, services, and goods that there was. And we will see a massive restructuring of all business sectors in the US. Anyone who can tell you how it will play out over the next 20 years is being less than truthful. The only thing we can expect is lower prices in areas, like housing, where demand drastically drops, and a much lower standard of living for most Americans.
If you arent prepared, you better get ready. You dont get to spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave for 90 years and not expect a hang over.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@S. Well for one regulation. I am not sure but coding laws in the US are insane. That creates a supply bottleneck, which creates cost increases. Add city planning to the mix, were certain land is approved for certain types of buildings, leads to a bottleneck, which creates price increase.
Take the price of wood. And I am not trying to turn this political, but the Biden Admin levied a doubling of the import tariff on importing of Canadian lumber into the US, this raised the price of lumber. Canada being pissed by this, decreased its output of lumber reducing total board feet. So increased tariffs and lower supply, thats right lumber prices quadrupled per board foot. This raised the price of construction of the average US home by 40k.
Would you want to live in a 1960s home? Worse wiring, no dishwasher, no washer and dryer maybe, so technologically have to spend more to bring it up to what is acceptable now. Increases the cost of a home.
But there is a bright end of the tunnel. And I know you live in Britain, but I am not at all familiar with your housing markets but I am familiar with your demographics map. So in the US, right now we have 2.8 people for every domicile. After the boomers pass, that will drop down to 2.2 to 2.3. Thats massive. Many places in Europe will see larger drops. You will have massive amounts of empty housing. Which will cause what up until the probably 1960s, when the boomers showed up, for residential housing to return to what it almost always was, a depreciation asset. Meaning its will become cheaper the older it gets, like a car. So if you do have kids, know your child or children will have it easier in that regard.
You are already seeing this in Korea and Japan. The demand curve is changing. And if Britain and other western nations stop bringing in foreigners it will collapse markets. And that usually causes governmental change.
Also your mortgage laws dont help. The fact that you cant get a pre negotiated rate for an entire term of the mortgage shocked me. I still dont understand how you can sign a mortgage and have it periodically update by the bank. That sounds absolutely predatory and seems designed to keep people renting. So I get that the US and British housing markets are totally comparable.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The AfD is the future of Germany. Right now they are enduring the immune reaction of the German political establishment, the same way that the US establishment, both Democrat and Republican reacted to Trumps brand of progressivism. The question in Germany, and Europe as a whole, is if they can endure the pending collapse and what will happen to all the millions of non Europeans who are currently there. Will they endure in enclaves, like Germans did in Ukraine and Hungary, pre WWII. Or will they be sweep, driven, or otherwise removed from Europe in a faster fashion?
Once the welfare state cracks in Europe, and it will if Trumps tariffs go into effect, then the knives will come out.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@dilipanthonypinto1620 ok lets say the officer shoots the guy in the leg or the gut (still can be fatal and bleed out quick), then the suspect deploys the officers taser, incapacitation the officer and taking his firearm.
What does the suspect do next? The officers use of force, while unfortunate, was completely justified in this situation. I am not even a fan of law enforcement. I do carry though, if anyone touches any weapon I have, without my authorization, they are a lethal threat. And I would treat them accordingly. If anything this officer waited to long.
People need to understand that if an officer is using his taser then he/she is not trying to kill you. If you touch that weapon platform, you become a lethal threat to that officer. But thats not what this was. This man was in possession of stolen property at best, at worst he was a car thief, eventually the whole story will come out. We should treat car thieves like we did horse thieves in the 19th century.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@S. Its a matter of choice not fault. It doesnt have to be a pejorative. But every choice has a consequence. If a woman wants a man her own age, she will be hard pressed to find one who has made his way in the world. Not only do young men have to compete with other men, they now are forced to compete with women as well. So she may look to one in his 30s or early 40s, will most women your age do that? No, its to stigmatizing. Well thats a choice.
These are all unintended consequences to choices. But they are still consequences. When women want kids enough, they will stay home and take care of their own and maybe take care of their neighbors as well. Earn a little coin doing it too. But that would require a change in lifestyle no?
Again, its not blame, its not good or bad, its just choices. And every choice, has a consequence. How you view that consequence is up to individual interpretation.
And you dont need as much money as you think. But you want that much because you like those things. When you want kids more than you want those things, you might compromise on it. Until then, again, its a choice that has a consequence.
I lived in California until last year. Arguably more expensive than Britain. I got married, had 3 sons, and bought 4 different houses. I did it on an income that maxed out at $65k, thats roughly 48.5k pounds.
I just want to say I dont blame young people, most are utterly ignorant of basic economic principles because they have never been taught them. If they did they would burn down their respective governments.
And lets be honest, most women have been so utterly brainwashed that most dont even think of getting married until maybe 28 and having a kid or maybe two once they are in their early 30s. I dont mean to sound insulting but its stunning how talking to younger women they all parrot the same thing. Yes I am also aware of how utterly stupid a man in his 20s is. I was one several decades ago. But men have the luxury of something women do not, time.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Coffeendonuts So respectfully, I'll answer, but from your post you are either so disconnected from the average American or have a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. Which is why I am saying respectfully, I am not trying to be insulting.
You dont understand the crippling effects of inflation. So that fuel increase which is insignificant to you, is roughly 140 a month difference. So maybe that is insignificant to you, but what about the people barely getting by. So they cut back other places.
How much has your food bill gone up? If you are normal American, in 2020 the average household spent almost $7800.00 a year on food. Add the 20% price increase to food this year and... thats an annual increase of $130 bucks. So now we add 140+130 and ones discretionary income has dropped by 270 dollars per year.
Shall we talk about rents or home prices? Those are up what 20% too? So people cut and cut and cut and soon then are only spending on what they must. But even then inflation doesnt let go. And then employers have to start laying people off.
Mcdonalds lays off or automates, wait they already have. All the costs of their food inputs increase, so they raise prices and people go less often, leading to a death spiral in the business.
This happens in all businesses with inflation and recession. Its my stagflation is so dangerous. And only one thing fixes stagflation, interest rates as high as the inflation to squeeze all the excess money out of the system that is causing the inflation.
Whats that do to home prices? Its not just oh no a recession house prices fall, its the whole economy. And since the 2008 crash we havent addressed the fundamental issues. Because to do so would cause most people to have to lower their standard of living.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You left out the most important thing, scale. Air planes dont work without economies of scale, steam ships dont work without economies of scale, trains dont work without economies of scale. Our modern farming and massive costs, dont work, without scale. Going out into the Siberian tundra to drill oil wells, doesnt make sense without economies of scale.
Scale matters. And for all of human history, The economies of scale has been absolute. Population was ever increasing, need was ever more. So, what happened, people had to be inventive. But what happens when that isnt the case? What happens when the population, as it is right now, begins a long steady decline. All of a sudden those vast investments dont make sense anymore. When the hope of return, instead of growing over the years, becomes less and less? Currently only 12 nations have population fertility rates significantly about 2.1, 10 of them are in sub saharan africa in nations that lack any infrastructure and are politically unstable.
People think places like Japan are the future, they are wrong. Japan is the first nation to automate due to its rapidly aging population. But they did that offshoring all their work to nations with less aged populations in south east asia, primarily, that they could pay small wages to, in comparison to at home.. Well there are none of those places left. No other nation will be able to replicate that.
And so as populations age, there will be more shortages, and yet, automation wont make sense since the rate of return on the massive investment will not be there. Until women decide to have more children, and those reasons are to complex to go into right now, this will not change. And even if it does, it will take at least 60 years to reverse trends.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sunset-inn There are two options, one is quick and easy the other leads to a lot of miser,y pain and ultimately death. Either path works.
The first path is the easy path. Stop supporting women at the government and corporate levels. They dont need to actively discriminate against women, like the have done to men, just dont have pro women policies. This would allow men to earn more, making them more attractive partners.
The 2nd path is less friendly. But its probably what will happen. Do nothing. Keep spending trillions we dont have on programs that dont work to employ people who do little. This will eventually lead to a crisis. When that happens, probably something like a sovereign debt default, all that free money goes away.
This will cause economic implosions as it spreads. Nations that export will implode. Nations that import will stop. Standards of living will dive. This is already happening in several nations. And it will get worse.
Most office jobs will die. The people they employ will need to do something, most of them women purely from a statistical standpoint.
But the thing is, men dont have to be rich. They just have to be better off than their women peers. Women will deny this, but the stats disagree with them.
But I fully admit I could be completely wrong and its just because women are totally oppressed by the patriarchy and are refusing to have kids.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@adamkaris My point was, if a house is meant to stand the test of time it has to be simple. Many dont want simple, they want modern. Why over engineer for something that will be outdated in a generation? And many of those cabins, with simple wiring, and a one room ac are very livable, the question is, does one want to live in a one room house, for many the answer is yes.
As for energy efficency, cabins hold thermal mass in the winter well and its thick walls, if the cabin was made with logs, prevent heat from entering in the summer as long as the chinking is good. The one thing they are prone to is humidity, and as I said, even a window AC, will quickly address that issue.
And I dont think its silly, up until a decade after WWII many American homes were built in a sectional process, like traditional American cabins, expanding with family need. With simple "dog runs" attachments are easily added.
As for basements, most cabins didnt need them. They had root cellars for those needs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Its not the fans, people who think that are naive, though I wish it were. This is about the cost of money that studios need to borrow to make these games. In the last two years the cost of borrowing money has gone up 450%. That changes the bottom line. At the same time politics from several years ago is presenting itself currently do to the creation cycle of content, in both movies and video games.
The cost of money, relative to the rate of return, will end this. Unfortunately, there are still enough people who believe reviews and will just buy a title or go see a movie and not demand a refund. When money costs were low, that was just part of the business. But now that its expensive, it will be crippling to the bottom line.
And the way things work is, the current game/money release and revenue pays for or is leveraged to, do the next creative thing. This will prevent them from moving forward. You are going to see a lot of things being canceled in the future. Just wont be the funds for them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ugly truth is the "greatest generation", silent generation, and boomers over promised, over spent, and under saved for said promises.
Come the 2030s, thats less that 6 years away, everything is going to break when SSI gets cut, right now it makes up 20% of federal spending. It will be cut by 22% in the early 2030s, if not sooner. If you cant do math that is about a 5% drop in federal spending just from SSI cuts. Other areas will need cutting as well. Because of that the economy will go into a permanent depression, Federal government spending is currently 40% of GDP, overnight until the US debt burden forces either massive inflationary printing or default. There are no other options anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@morelkeslassy3500 You know what, I came off as an ass. So I am sorry, that wasnt my intent. Inflation will cause housing to drop, it always does. People dont have extra money to spend on housing so prices deflate. Add to this rising interest rates, to combat inflation, which pushes monthly payments higher if a house wants to sell it has to drop its price to meet that price point.
And finally you have the boomers, who as they entered into the work force, crashed worker pay, because there were so many of them, and inflated demand for housing so prices increased, will cause massive deflationary pressure as they leave this realm.
The only real question is will those houses be able to cater to modern needs and are those homes located in areas people want to live in today.
This speaks nothing about Millennial family creation which is in the toilet. It just never materialized.
1
-
@joeswanson733 lmao yes we did. Blackrock has existed since 1988. They buy all manner of things, including homes. REITs, Real Estate Investment Trusts, have existed since the 1960s, you just think that its a problem now because people make a big deal out of it. But the homes they own is a rounding error.
REITs own about 500k properties, not homes, properties, and slightly more than 15 million acres of land. If you think REITs owning less than 500k American homes is causing all these problem, well your thinking meat aint good, respectfully.
So walk with me here. If REITs own 500k properties, the maximum number of homes REITs could own is 500k, right? Well right now, there is over 83 million single family, detached, homes in the US. That means, in your head, REITs owning a possible 0.6% of the housing market is the problem? And lets be honest, the real number is lower. Most REIT holdings are in commercial real estate.
We have this problem for one reason, inflation. Our nation, and many others have had horrible monetary policies since 2008. And now, there is no more room to wiggle. Prices will come down. Why would Blackrock invest in a deflating asset?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There will be no civil war unless the right decides it no longer has a vested interest in the United States. Right now, the right, typically supports law enforcement and the use of the military. That is starting to change. Law enforcement, due to increasing oppressive laws, is seen as more oppressive by the right as well.
And at the beginning of the Trump admin the right held Trump to his promise of no more wars, the virus hit and you had all these civilians being fired and replaced by military because of failure to comply. People will remember that.
If the right slips in its faith that its government, at least in scope if not actual practice, is fair an impartial, God help us all. Because as history shows, the original American revolution was an aberration. I doubt we would get a restoration of our rights, not matter if that was the intent.
Good video
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have never had a hard time dating. face wise I am not attractive. I am tall, 6'7" but from women's preferences thats similar to being 5'10", im to tall. But I am 48 and am in decent shape and independently unemployed, I tend to date women around the age of 30. Its insanely easy to talk to a woman. Most are starved for a kind word or even a genuine smile.
But I think one of the bigger things is that so many people, both men and women, are undatable today. Right off the top, 70% of people in the US are either overweight or obese. Right there those folks are disqualified. But those same 70% will want someone who is "perfect" without understanding their shortcomings or more importantly, improving themselves.
Then you add things like politics, religion or lack there of, and simple physical attraction, pretty soon you find you are hunting for the 1%. But what really stuns me, is even at the age of 30, most women arent looking to get married. They arent dating seriously, they are still in fun mode. That is really what has changed.
Ill ask them, do you want a family or get married and they all parrot the same thing, im still young. I am happy and having fun. I still dont know what I want yet. These same womens great grandmothers knew what they wanted when they were 18. I think we have infantilized a lot of people. The are adults in body only. They think they can have healthy children well into their 40s with no threat to their physical health. And these are supposedly college educated and smart women.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@babyamyxo-o6c The red pill, in theory, at least in its original form, was a reaction to laws being unjust, which was basically the mens right movement (which was an abject failure) as well as a total rejection of 4th wave feminism. Not that 4th wave feminism was bad, but that it was just factually incorrect.
4th wave feminism just teaches women to fear men. Things like we live in a rape culture, the current view of patriarchy, that helps no one navigate their world and often actually impedes women as we can see today. That fear of course will turn to hate and resentment. Thats not good for anyone, men or women.
But how does it benefit women? It makes men better. Feminism has been a failure, at least the 4th wave variant and I would argue 3rd wave as well, at least when it comes to womens happiness and life fulfillment. Its also made men objectively worse, which is bad for women too. The red pill is really the only thing pushing back against it. And I think its why you see the bifurcation in young men and women politically to the extent you do today.
But as it has gone main stream I think a lot of grifters have come into the space and really muddied the waters, ironically these people tend to be both men and women. But the same message is there. The red pill isnt a lifestyle. Its something you endure to grow, become better, preferably heal from past traumas, and then move on in life with the knowledge that allows you to be a better man. But those men are the silent ones. Folks just hear the ones in the rage. And they can be very very loud.
Sorry for the tome.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lucas-hb1uq I see peoples actions everyday. Most people are irresponsible, overly emotional and foolish to the nth degree. Universal suffrage has weaponized ignorance.
Its not about classes, its about personal responsibility. Few want to be personally responsible anymore. So they heap all that onto whatever government exists. "Democracy" just lets people feel more comfortable with enslaving themselves because they are supposedly their own master. But its a lie.
And yes, I am saying ALL government is bad. Its tyrannical. It limits the best in men. It punishes those who would leave their mark on the world. But it is a needed evil. Because Man is also self interested, and when you take that self interest to an extreme you get things like theft, rape and murder. But we should have the least of it, government, we can. When you make a government a democracy, all of those people who dont want to be responsible end up enslaving themselves because they are foolish.
I dont know how otherwise intelligent people cannot see this. But that should show you that there is no link between intelligence and personal responsibility. But whats worse, one cannot chose ones intelligence, but one can chose to be responsible. That screams about most peoples moral character. And why democracy should be feared.
Tyrants die, but the mob just breeds.
1
-
@Lucas-hb1uq I thought governments were the people? That must mean people want the environment destroyed, no?
As for corporations, they are businesses. They want to make money for their shareholders. So their shareholders, being people as well, are responsible. But lets say their greed, their self interest, outweighs their common sense for long term. They are a business. Other people, the public, simple need to no longer buy their product, goods, or services. Then the business can either a) go out of business or b) change their business practice. But guess what that takes on the publics part, personal responsibility.
People like you flower up your words and obfuscate. But you are either tyrants in disguise, because you dislike others choices, or are irresponsible who dont want to be held accountable for their actions because it might inconvenience you and you dont want your hands dirty. Or am I missing something?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@batsonelectronics You are projecting a bit here. Every cop does not want to get into an altercation, though some do. I imagine those encounters have made you pre judge all law enforcement, thats your choice.
If someone came at me with a taser, and I was armed, and they knew I was armed, I would shoot them. If they incapacitate me with the taser, they then have access to my firearm. I am guessing you dont carry. And thats probably a good thing.
I'll concede the cop made a lot of mistakes. That said, none of this would have happened if the victim/suspect had did what he was legally obligated to do. That in itself does not entitle the leo to be able to kill him though. He had the cops taser, its @ 1:05 in the video. All he had to do is touch the cops arm with it and pull the trigger, fight over. The cop knew this since he was trained, as you pointed out.
If I may ask, seriously, where did you receive your weapons training? Or is this coming from strictly politicized thinking? Either way I wont hate on you for it. I love freedom, people should be able to hold whatever position they want. But I would hope they would do it on unbiased info and actual experience, and yes i know that is a bit naive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would like to point out that the median home price of $187,200.00 in 2022 would be, adjusted for inflation, $286,622.98. The current median home price for a home in the US is about $454,900.00 for Q3 in 2022. Current prices would need to drop 37%, or $168,277.02, to reach those levels.
For the 1990 price of $121,500, in 2022 inflation adjusted value that would be $265,794.67, So a little less than 2002. To get prices to that level you would need about a 42% price drop, or $189,105.33.
But with that data, and with current demographic trends, do you think there is more or less housing demand in 1990 or 2002, than there is today? If you look at that data, you can clearly see demand is falling by volume of people needing homes vs available homes. Which means if interest rates hits double digits, prices will more than likely have to drop more than 42%.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AuroStorm Yes I know, from the Dobbs decision, "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision..."
Because of that the 10th Amendment holds sway giving abortion to the States to decide. If people want to change that, they can. They just need to pass a Constitutional amendment. A law will not cut it, because that law would violate the 10th Amendment. This would also prevent anyone from doing a total Federal ban because again, 10th amendment.
Its the same reason why the 13th and 14th amendments needed to be passed in regards to slavery.
That said, I really do appreciate your civility in this. Far to many people are aggressively irrational with this matter, on both sides. Perhaps we disagree on the procedural legalities, but again, I appreciate your civility. Gives me hope.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KennTollens Price is still increasing because the boomers are still in the early stages of their die off. But as they pick up the pace, demand will plummet and supply will rise, from houses to food, IF production stays steady. But it wont. Production already maxed out in 2018-2019. The question will be if demand declines faster than production. If it does, then you will see real price decline.
But again, as deflation hits, the debt burden weighs more and, more importantly, its on fewer shoulders. Then comes the time to decide, do we (whatever group we is) keep paying or do we default. Both options cripple. Default hurts more at the beginning, but allows a society to rebuild faster. But people and corporations always want welfare. So it will be the last thing to happen. And that means their will be another lost generation, just as Japan has had. But this time its world wide.
In regards to asking why dont we just go ape crazy with debt, we have over the last 3 years. Its destroyed our markets. Its caused inflation and now the fall will be from a higher height, making the impact worse. No one is buying the debt. So the Fed has to. Pretty soon there will be no more money in the system, so you make more causing even more inflation. Then you end up like Zimbabwe.
The difference between a billion and a trillion is a lot. When I was born a Coke cost 25 cents and a house averaged 20k. Thats the difference between a billion and a trillion and the higher it goes the more it increases. And what few seem to understand, that people who have investments love inflation, it makes their wealth worth more to those that have none. And those people who have no investments are very quickly left in the dust as inflation eats them alive.
I want to restate, I dont dislike your idea or want, but unfortunately those who came before you put you on a course with limited options. May I ask your age?
1
-
@KennTollens No, things werent alright when we went off the gold standard. You have to go all the way back to the Bretton Woods agreement. We basically took over the British Empires financial responsibility for the world.
The Petrodollar was created. This single act, where all oil transactions are paid for in US dollars, was a double edged sword. It made dollars valuable so print away and it wont show up because everyone everywhere in the world wants them. Even right now the dollar is strong, everyone everywhere still wants dollars.
We also agreed to open our markets to the world so that they would A0 stop killing each other and B) join us in the fight against the Soviets should war break out. But this effectively eroded our nations industrial capacity in the long run. Part of this agreement was protecting the ocean shipping lanes. Under the Trump admin we finally started rolling that back by basically telling India the India ocean is yours. we arent policing it. We cant afford to anymore.
As far as rich people being mad for a financial reset, again no not really. Most people think rich folks have vaults of money that they swim in like scrooge McDuck. They dont. Rich people have assets. Currency is just a tool to leverage to gain wealth. Your dollars in your wallet are actually debt. Our nation does its best to keep normal people ignorant about these things.
No, if there was a monetary reset anyone who had a mortgage or a car note would be hardest hit. Most "Rich" folks dont have those. If they have debt, they can liquidate some assets to pay off any debts that they did owe before any reset occurred.
The end result would be people having to live according to their means. Which if we did in the first place, none of this would have happened. But the root cause of all this is universal suffrage.
To people today voting is a right. But voting, throughout history was never a right, it was a responsibility. A responsibility granted to only those who were independent and personally responsible. How many Americans are actually independent today? How many people pay more in, than they take out? Few, probably less than 20%.
Thats where we need to fix things. Because if everyone can vote the irresponsible will just out vote the responsible. And we will be right back in this situation. Well thats how i see things anyways.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You didnt even discuss the main problem with a declining population that will destroy nations and kill millions, maybe even billions of people, national debt. As nations become less able to generate tax revenue due to fewer workers and needing to support more people on their social services, more debt will need to be taken out. But there will come a point where that debt can no longer be serviced and then a default happens.
Take a nation like Japan. Zero natural resources. Overnight, after a default, with no one willing to sell them anything on debt, they slip back into a pre industrial world. All their national social systems shut down. No more hospitals no more trains. Everything stops. No more pension checks from the State. This means the economy of that nation wont even be able to function either. This will happen to other nations as their debt piles up. And very quickly global trade will collapse. Only a few modern nations will survive. Those who have the resources to make a modern nation run.
This will even hit the "developing world". Imagine a nation like Egypt where they need to import almost 90% of their calories can no longer get those calories because state funded grain farmers stop getting funds to farm. Most of sub Saharan Africa will implode as well.
The bright side of this, if you can call it that, is that this will self correct. As national social programs break the thing that got humanity to modernity will kick back in as a survival mechanism, the multigenerational family. Most modern ideals, will simply die because survival will take precedence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1