If the Trump campaign paid for it as an ad, I’m not upset by it assuming anyone else could have paid to promote an alternative political candidate.

If it’s an in-kind donation to the campaign, that’s troublesome.

Real answer, Elon made it more friendly to the far right (the racists and Nazis) and unbanned a bunch of them who had previously been banned for being too racist and Nazi. Then he introduced a subscription service where you pay to have Twitter spread your content.

So that started a doom loop: The far right bought the additional views, people who didn’t appreciate the extra racism and Nazi views on their timeline left Twitter, but the view boost was paid for so it kept pushing those views to the fewer people who remained, then THAT volume of hate pushed more people away, etc.

It probably got to the point that they couldn’t keep paid views high enough with just people who care about politics and they had to just push at all costs, eventually to you.

It’s all a hypothetical, feel free to just decide you are that type of person. No harm in it.

In real life though, if money is no object, the difference between a 2017 normal car and a 2025 luxury car is literally just “do you want extra features and a bigger screen on a car that will last longer?” It just doesn’t make sense to get the cheaper version, unless you are giving up something else because you only have a limited amount of money.

Only insofar as you would say they destroy money supply when a loan is repaid. They just create a credit and a debit that cancel out.

It was always short sighted tax policy. We’re just living with the blowback.

But in 1954, apparently intending to stimulate capital investment in manufacturing in order to counter a mild recession, Congress replaced the straight-line approach with “accelerated depreciation,” which enabled owners to take huge deductions in the early years of a project’s life. This, Hanchett says, “transformed real-estate development into a lucrative ‘tax shelter.’ An investor making a profit from rental of a new building usually avoided all taxes on that income, since the ‘loss’ from depreciation canceled it out. And when the depreciation exceeded profits from the building itself—as it virtually always did in early years—the investor could use the excess ‘loss’ to cut other income taxes.” With realestate values going up during the 1950s and ’60s, savvy investors “could build a structure, claim ‘losses’ for several years while enjoying tax-free income, then sell the project for more than they had originally invested.”

Since the “accelerated depreciation” rule did not apply to renovation of existing buildings, investors “now looked away from established downtowns, where vacant land was scarce and new construction difficult,” Hanchett says. "Instead, they rushed to put their money into projects at the suburban fringe—especially into shopping centers.

http://archive.wilsonquarterly.com/in-essence/why-america-got-malled

The one example I’m familiar with is a name brand ice cream company that produces the store brand ice cream too…in that case the recipe is different, cheaper ingredients to cut costs to the bare minimum. But using the machines for a higher volume saves money.

I’m sure ‘same exact item’ does happen too but just ‘same manufacturer’ doesn’t mean exactly the same item.

Can’t believe Harriet Tubman got all that infrastructure up.

It’s not “the beginning of a meltdown” because everybody still owns all their money and no bank is failing. There’s a customer service issue for users of a non-bank service. That is part of the risk you take when you’re putting money in a non-bank.

It sucks for the users obviously but like where would a contagion even begin? This is already the largest BaaS middleman. This is as big as this issue gets.

I feel like weight class doesn’t do it. Women have higher body fat %. Is a welterweight woman athletically equivalent to a welterweight man? I don’t think so.

Yeah that would suck. But it’s still just a true statement. If Kyle Rittenhouse hates America he can leave.

Even if Native Americans do like America they can leave.

Anyone can leave for any reason.

It’s just a dumb…I don’t know I guess it’s not actually a threat. Dumb phrase.

Anyone can leave if they hate America.

Not for House or Senate. Age just isn’t a close enough metric for what you’re trying to fix.

If you’re concerned with age-related decline, vote them out if you see signs of it, or if they would reach whatever age your limit is during the term.

If you’re concerned about longevity in office, use term limits or reform campaign finance such that longevity in office doesn’t grant too high of an incumbent advantage.

SCOTUS, sure. I think Canada has appointments until 75. Does not seem meaningfully different from appointments for life except less randomness on open slots.

As far as I know the expectation is he’ll start week 1.

So funny to call him “Former Green Bay Packers Quarterback.”

He’s going into his second season on the Jets.

Even if there was, there’s no currency that is guaranteed to not depreciate in the future.

Putting a percentage of your income in the stock market is a very good idea. Even if you’re a conspiracy person and you think a mysterious “them” controls the world, “them” are rich people who own stocks. They will make sure the value of stocks go up.

If you’re not a conspiracy person, just look at history. The value of stocks always goes up in the long term, and you hold retirement accounts for the long term.

Or it’s a coincidence. N=2

Wild that he was unable to prove that homeless people can just decide to earn $83,000/month.

If the headline was “Scrabble bans hateful words” nobody would care because it’s their game, they can do what they want with it and nobody has sympathy for the guys complaining they can’t be racist in Scrabble.

But using the word “woke” makes it sound like it’s some ongoing culture war battle with half the country on either side. It ain’t.

Pretty compelling case against suicide tbh, unusual as it may be.