There's two sides to that argument. On one hand you're correct and the data is more accessible to anyone who wants to pull it. On the other hand, you don't need to sign a ToS agreement with stackexchange to use it and therefore it's still yours and not theirs because you never clicked anything giving it to them.
I fired up my iPod touch 2nd gen MC model (real OGs know why that matters and why it sucked back then) and it was really sad. Entire app store full of apps, and none of them installable.
Here's one from an establishment media source, but I first saw it on post millennial, and there was just a post a few minutes ago from gateway pundit
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/new-york-governor-regrets-black-kids-bronx-computer-109992992
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/new-york-governor-regrets-black-kids-bronx-computer-109992992
When I see an ad for Opera GX on youtube.... I'm seeing a company whose revenue comes from getting paid by google... paying someone.... on google.... to shill a browser that makes money by..... getting people to use Google?
We live in a strange world.
We live in a strange world.
Even if taxes don't change, the inflation tax goes up every year for 2 reasons.
First, your wage loses X% of its buying power every year so if you don't get a wage increase you just lost X% of your earnings forevermore.
Second, higher wages are taxed at higher rates due to progressive taxation, so despite having the same buying power on your new wage you're taxed more.
Third, inflation causes nominal capital gains that aren't real. Let's say that you bought enough stock to buy a basket of goods in 1980. If you sell the stock, assuming it kept up with inflation it should buy the same basket of goods. The problem is that the number of dollars it takes to buy the same basket of goods doubled (even if you believe the "inflation has been 2% lie) so the stock doubled, and so now you owe taxes on a 100% gain, even though it didn't actually gain value. In that sense, inflation *is* a wealth tax because the government gets a cut despite your wealth not increasing.
First, your wage loses X% of its buying power every year so if you don't get a wage increase you just lost X% of your earnings forevermore.
Second, higher wages are taxed at higher rates due to progressive taxation, so despite having the same buying power on your new wage you're taxed more.
Third, inflation causes nominal capital gains that aren't real. Let's say that you bought enough stock to buy a basket of goods in 1980. If you sell the stock, assuming it kept up with inflation it should buy the same basket of goods. The problem is that the number of dollars it takes to buy the same basket of goods doubled (even if you believe the "inflation has been 2% lie) so the stock doubled, and so now you owe taxes on a 100% gain, even though it didn't actually gain value. In that sense, inflation *is* a wealth tax because the government gets a cut despite your wealth not increasing.
I can't wrap my mind around the idea that the sort of people who wouldn't be caught dead at a formula one race would be upset that the sort of people who would pay to go aren't like them.
Self check-out in Walmart has gone very poorly, with high levels of theft (or sometimes just incompetence as people mess things up). So in some locations, in order to have the privilege of doing a cashier's job for them, you have to pay for a 100USD/yr Walmart+ membership.
That's an impressive level of audacity. "We want you do do this thing that was previously an employees job, and we want you to pay for the privilege"
That's an impressive level of audacity. "We want you do do this thing that was previously an employees job, and we want you to pay for the privilege"
The governor of New York is on the record as saying: “Right now we have, you know, young black kids growing up in the Bronx who don’t even know what the word ‘computer’ is.”
The idea of Ms. Progressive who is in charge of one of the two states most likely to look down its nose at you for not being progressive enough being more racist than internet racists is hilarious on its face, obviously.
But then consider -- what exactly does she think this looks like? Like, a black kid sees a PC and they're like "Do I eat it? Do I smoke it?" -- Or do they just worship it like the monolith in 2001 a space odyssey?
Sometimes the universe just gives you things to brighten your day.
And of course, she did correct herself afterwards: "I misspoke and I regret it. Of course, Black children in the Bronx know what computers are" but the laugh track has already played, can't put the laughter back in the bottle.
The idea of Ms. Progressive who is in charge of one of the two states most likely to look down its nose at you for not being progressive enough being more racist than internet racists is hilarious on its face, obviously.
But then consider -- what exactly does she think this looks like? Like, a black kid sees a PC and they're like "Do I eat it? Do I smoke it?" -- Or do they just worship it like the monolith in 2001 a space odyssey?
Sometimes the universe just gives you things to brighten your day.
And of course, she did correct herself afterwards: "I misspoke and I regret it. Of course, Black children in the Bronx know what computers are" but the laugh track has already played, can't put the laughter back in the bottle.
I don't know what you mean! Jerome Powell just said the other day he doesn't see any stag and he doesn't see any flation!
Why would he lie?
Why would he lie?
Sounds like a laugh a minute! Your sides will be splitting! (possibly due to all the murder and tortue and demons?)
There's a lot that needs to be revisited. How many military leaders bragged in books or interviews about lying to the commander in chief to get their way?
"we're gonna take these hooligans shoe polish away! They won't be able to shine their pompodors then!"
"And this is called the wealthy class, and the drones feed upon them.
That is pretty much the case, he said.
The people are a third class, consisting of those who work with their own hands; they are not politicians, and have not much to live upon. This, when assembled, is the largest and most powerful class in a democracy.
True, he said; but then the multitude is seldom willing to congregate unless they get a little honey.
And do they not share? I said. Do not their leaders deprive the rich of their estates and distribute them among the people; at the same time taking care to reserve the larger part for themselves?
Why, yes, he said, to that extent the people do share.
And the persons whose property is taken from them are compelled to defend themselves before the people as they best can?
What else can they do?" - Plato discussing democracy in book 8 of The Republic. This is part of a description of how democracy descends inevitably into Tyranny.
That is pretty much the case, he said.
The people are a third class, consisting of those who work with their own hands; they are not politicians, and have not much to live upon. This, when assembled, is the largest and most powerful class in a democracy.
True, he said; but then the multitude is seldom willing to congregate unless they get a little honey.
And do they not share? I said. Do not their leaders deprive the rich of their estates and distribute them among the people; at the same time taking care to reserve the larger part for themselves?
Why, yes, he said, to that extent the people do share.
And the persons whose property is taken from them are compelled to defend themselves before the people as they best can?
What else can they do?" - Plato discussing democracy in book 8 of The Republic. This is part of a description of how democracy descends inevitably into Tyranny.
If you think about it, there have been poorly thought out inflationary policies for a long time. Between bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden, theyve increased the money supply massively and also massively increased the federal debt that was only 4 trillion around 1999. Anyone who is alive and uses money knows that things have gotten massively more expensive, but the calculation for consumer prices has been fiddled with enough to make the claim that inflation has barely broken 2%. It's marking your own homework at that point, but they could find enough half marks to pass. The result of all this monetary policy for 20 years it's been two make the economy and the aggregate look better by creating some of the richest people in the history of the world. Elon Musk wouldn't be the richest man on earth in a sane world -- his car company isn't that good and people are finally starting to realize that, but people bought it because it went up, and it went up because people bought it, and all the extra money sloshing around helped.
Covid lockdowns did 3 things:
1. Shut down a lot of productive capacity by fiat. Inflation is often a self-limiting process because higher prices cause companies to spin up new productive capacity, but where the capacity is not allowed due to government, prices can go up an unlimited amount.
2. Hand out money to everyone. People who get money often spend it, leading to that product being accounted for. The rich invest, driving up assets, but the poor consume, driving up goods prices.
3. They funded the money that they gave to everyone with monetized debt. QE works by the central bank going to banks and buying their government debt from them for printed money. It replaces bonds on A bank's balance sheet with cash, which can then be used to buy more bonds (because the banks need a certain amount of debt which is an asset for them since they lend the money). This means that of the trillions of dollars spent, many of them are effectively new dollars that were magiced into existence by the central bank. Compared to typical bond buying where somebody with money has to spend that money to lend the money to the government, meaning that the net amount of money in the system hasn't really changed, here the money just comes to exist.
So while the inflationary policies before covid didn't help, and I definitely would agree they helped set up a pile of wood to burn, and policies after covid haven't helped, pouring gasoline on the fire by trying to make people's lives more expensive when they need the opposite, it was the policies during covid that lit the fire of inflation we are in right now.
Covid lockdowns did 3 things:
1. Shut down a lot of productive capacity by fiat. Inflation is often a self-limiting process because higher prices cause companies to spin up new productive capacity, but where the capacity is not allowed due to government, prices can go up an unlimited amount.
2. Hand out money to everyone. People who get money often spend it, leading to that product being accounted for. The rich invest, driving up assets, but the poor consume, driving up goods prices.
3. They funded the money that they gave to everyone with monetized debt. QE works by the central bank going to banks and buying their government debt from them for printed money. It replaces bonds on A bank's balance sheet with cash, which can then be used to buy more bonds (because the banks need a certain amount of debt which is an asset for them since they lend the money). This means that of the trillions of dollars spent, many of them are effectively new dollars that were magiced into existence by the central bank. Compared to typical bond buying where somebody with money has to spend that money to lend the money to the government, meaning that the net amount of money in the system hasn't really changed, here the money just comes to exist.
So while the inflationary policies before covid didn't help, and I definitely would agree they helped set up a pile of wood to burn, and policies after covid haven't helped, pouring gasoline on the fire by trying to make people's lives more expensive when they need the opposite, it was the policies during covid that lit the fire of inflation we are in right now.
One big thing is I keep hearing that many of the protestors aren't even students and don't necessarily even believe in what they're protesting but are paid professionals.
I really think there's a case to be made for forcing paid protesters to disclose that they're being paid and by whom.
You know me, I'm a huge supporter of the 1st amendment and free speech in general, but disingenuous astroturf protests that are paid for by moneyed interests in my view becomes more like other forms of regulated political advertising and should be treated as such.
There was also an incident in the news recently that an onlyfans thot admitted to being paid by the Biden campaign to talk about how happy having minorities on the supreme court made her "as a woman of color", and that she shouldn't disclose that at all because she wasn't selling a commercial product so it would be fine. More astroturfing, and I think it's deceptive and should be treated like other deceptive advertising.
When I was in college;
1. I didn't have money for a nice-ass tent to go protest something that had nothing to do with me. Many of those tents look like they'd cost my food budget for a month. When I wanted a bike, I had to ride that bike to and from school and work every day because I paid for it using my bus pass fund.
2. I was paying five figures to be there (and ivy leaguers would be paying six figures to be there), I wasn't going to pay thousands of dollars to not graduate because I was living in a tent to go protest something that had nothing to do with me.
I really think there's a case to be made for forcing paid protesters to disclose that they're being paid and by whom.
You know me, I'm a huge supporter of the 1st amendment and free speech in general, but disingenuous astroturf protests that are paid for by moneyed interests in my view becomes more like other forms of regulated political advertising and should be treated as such.
There was also an incident in the news recently that an onlyfans thot admitted to being paid by the Biden campaign to talk about how happy having minorities on the supreme court made her "as a woman of color", and that she shouldn't disclose that at all because she wasn't selling a commercial product so it would be fine. More astroturfing, and I think it's deceptive and should be treated like other deceptive advertising.
When I was in college;
1. I didn't have money for a nice-ass tent to go protest something that had nothing to do with me. Many of those tents look like they'd cost my food budget for a month. When I wanted a bike, I had to ride that bike to and from school and work every day because I paid for it using my bus pass fund.
2. I was paying five figures to be there (and ivy leaguers would be paying six figures to be there), I wasn't going to pay thousands of dollars to not graduate because I was living in a tent to go protest something that had nothing to do with me.