Aaron Thomas wrote to All <=-
"We are almost in the fascist state now."
(I wonder which state she lives in?)
"We've been taken over by robber barrons"
(WTF are robber barrons?)
"Democracy should not be eliminated by this fascist regime."
(The guy who said this is wearing a mask and he's outdoors.)
So to summarize it, they are all a bunch of idiots who don't work, they know people who have been fired, they wear masks outdoors, and they are afraid of rubber bands.
"We are almost in the fascist state now."
(I wonder which state she lives in?)
None of these people know what the word "fascist" means. If they did, (and they had any self-awareness) they would realize that the Democrats are the fascist ones. And really have been before WWII. After WWII the Dems have worked hard to change the meaning of "fascist".
(WTF are robber barrons?)
History class. Standard Oil. The railroads.
"The best democracy that has transitioned to dictatorship"
(Trump won in a historic landslide election.)
"I'm protesting everything that Trump stands for."
(He's protesting the will of the American people.)
"I think our leader is tariffing us and arresting people."
(He thinks wrong.)
"We've been taken over by robber barrons"
(WTF are robber barrons?)
So to summarize it, they are all a bunch of idiots who don't work, they know people who have been fired, they wear masks outdoors, and they are afraid of rubber bands.
"The best democracy that has transitioned to dictatorship"
(Trump won in a historic landslide election.)
You need to look at the numbers again. Both Trump and Harris got just over 30% of the vote. They came in second and third, respectively, to "either skipped voting in the Presiential race or voted third party."
See above re: "will of the people." Also catch some of the folks
claiming they voted for Trump but "didn't vote for this" after some of
his and Elon's decisions lead to them or a family member losing their jobs, their investments, etc.
"I think our leader is tariffing us and arresting people."
(He thinks wrong.)
His administration is arresting people. People who were allegedly
members of a Venezuelan gang have recently been deported to El Salvador. The government has since admited that at least one of them was deported
in error and that they, the government of the supposedly strongest
country in the world, has no idea how to get him back.
In other cases, ethnic minorities (non-Venezuelans) have been arrested by persons wearing masks and taken to locations that are unknown to their family members. As these folks were here legally, they have a legal
right to representation, among other rights, that are not being
satisfied.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
Even if they knew the meaning of the word, they'd still misuse it,
because that's what a good little monkeys does if he wants to get paid.
Oh, I get it now. But damn, these people are old to use words like
that. Who do they think they're impressing? I'm starting to wonder if George dug these people out of a 19th century graveyard and exposed
them to toxic waste ;)
You need to look at the numbers again. Both Trump and Harris got just over 30% of the vote. They came in second and third, respectively, to "either skipped voting in the Presiential race or voted third party."
His victory was declared much faster than Biden's 2020 win. Trump won the majority of votes in every single county in 2 states. He won the majority of votes in every state considered a "swing state." You would have to get pretty technical to downplay all that.
See above re: "will of the people." Also catch some of the folks claiming they voted for Trump but "didn't vote for this" after some of his and Elon's decisions lead to them or a family member losing their jobs, their investments, etc.
Who though? I don't know anyone with a legitimate complaint. The voters asked for this. We are mean. We knew what the consequences would be, and so far it's not nearly as bad as we feared. The USSC said the firings are fine.
Nobody has lost their investments. Federal workers still have their pensionf
they earned one. Stock owners still own their stock. Stocks fluctuate and if someone's looking for a quick buck, they'll need to get a job for now andait
it out if it's not time to sell.
For the smarter ones, yes. But my point is that these people cannot
think for themselves. They can't understand the meaning of the word nor can they correct that.
And it goes much farther than the meaning of just 1 word.
If we are lucky, the jab will kick in for most of these people over the next 4 years and we won't have to worry about them voting anymore.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
If we are lucky, the jab will kick in for most of these people over the next 4 years and we won't have to worry about them voting anymore.
Remember: The more booster shots you take, the more protected you are
;)
The USSC did *not* say the firings were fine. They said the persons could be kept on administrative leave until the cases on their behalf have played out. Not certain in these cases, but "administrative leave" in government terms usually means "with pay," which translates to paying people to not work.
I'd rather see the money get wasted this way than in some other way. To not waste any money on redundancy is not an option anyway.
nvestment4,000 points is nearly a 10% (9.48%) drop. So, yes, people whose retirements are dependent on the stock market are losing a lot of money. If you add in the third day of losses, the losses were the worst seen since three days of the "Black Monday" 1987 panic.
These are people who chose to enroll in a 401k plan. They put their
into someone else's hands. The stock market isn't a guaranteed income. Personally, I prefer to just save money in a savings account or in a CD. That way my money's not going anywhere and I don't have to wait for it for an undetermined amount of time.
The USSC did *not* say the firings were fine. They said the persons
could be kept on administrative leave until the cases on their behalf
have played out. Not certain in these cases, but "administrative leave" in government terms usually means "with pay," which translates to paying people to not work.
it out if it's not time to sell.
One week ago, the stock market suffered its largest crash since the 2020 COVID-19 induced crash. Think for a second... Biden was not President then, and isn't now. Also significant because, in 2020, the fall was
the result of a global pandemic. This time, it was simply the result of Trump playing games.
4,000 points is nearly a 10% (9.48%) drop. So, yes, people whose retirements are dependent on the stock market are losing a lot of money. If you add in the third day of losses, the losses were the worst seen since three days of the "Black Monday" 1987 panic.
I'd rather see the money get wasted this way than in some other way. To waste any money on redundancy is not an option anyway.
You do realize it is the same amount of money, right, and that it is better to pay people to at least be at work instead of doing nothing, right?
In most places, thanks to folks like Trump, your only retirement choice
is a 401K or another similar stock market based plan. You must not be very employed or you'd know that.
I have savings accounts and CDs, too. I think they are a good idea, even though over the years it has become more difficult to get a good return rate on savings accounts. These investments are also not immune to what
is going on as what is going on will affect interest rates.
You also know that Trump had to hit pause on his little game because the other countries called his bluff and started dumping US bonds, which is not a good thing, right? I am betting that he did not see that coming.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Mike Powell <=-
I don't know what that's like. Retirement plans have always been
optional at the places I've worked. Is that not the case for everyone?
I guess it could but my point is that those are investment options
where you can't lose what you put into them, unlike stocks.
What's wrong with losing our borrowing power? And what's wrong with interest rates going up? If it's not due to the tariffs, then they'll
just go up for some other random reason.
oI'd rather see the money get wasted this way than in some other way.
waste any money on redundancy is not an option anyway.
You do realize it is the same amount of money, right, and that it is better to pay people to at least be at work instead of doing nothing, right?
We're going through a process to terminate their employment. I wish it could
done more quickly, but it can't, so we'll have to pay them for now.
You also know that Trump had to hit pause on his little game because the other countries called his bluff and started dumping US bonds, which is not a good thing, right? I am betting that he did not see that coming.
What's wrong with losing our borrowing power? And what's wrong with interest rates going up? If it's not due to the tariffs, then they'll just go up for some other random reason.
I don't know what that's like. Retirement plans have always been optional at the places I've worked. Is that not the case for everyone
Yup. It's optional. The only mandatory "retirement plan" is the Socialist Security that the Elitists keep stealing from.
But Mike probably doesn't work for a living, so he wouldn't understand
any of this.
Any investment plan has the risk of loss. Some are just less riskier
than others. The less risky ones also have a lower rate of return. That's why when we are young, we choose the high-return/high-risk plans, but as we get older we change to the lower risk plans.
But, again, if Mike actually had a real job, he'd know this.
We're going through a process to terminate their employment. I wish it c
done more quickly, but it can't, so we'll have to pay them for now.
Ultimately, it won't happen in most cases. They will have to hire them back.
If we lose our borrowing power then we cannot get money from anywhere.
We are running in the red, not the black, and nothing Trump is doing is going to change that. And what happens when you have no money and
cannot borrow any money?
aveWe're going through a process to terminate their employment. I wish it
done more quickly, but it can't, so we'll have to pay them for now.
Ultimately, it won't happen in most cases. They will have to hire them back.
But what happens if the positions are no longer being offered? Won't they
to work in a different department? Nobody can demand that we reopen the Dept. of DEI.
If we lose our borrowing power then we cannot get money from anywhere. We are running in the red, not the black, and nothing Trump is doing is going to change that. And what happens when you have no money and cannot borrow any money?
When that happens, then you don't borrow anymore, and you make do with what you've got. (less cheeseburgers, more ramen noodles.)
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
Most people probably enroll in the 401k plan, and it's great when the employer offers to contribute, but people who have low paying jobs
can't afford it, and they rely on social security.
Full time Fidonet echo moderator is a fulfilling, challenging, stable,
and lucrative career. The pay might not be that great, but it's a great resume builder ;)
That makes sense. But if you invest in a CD and you don't cash it out early, (and I could be wrong about this) then I think your investment
is 100% guaranteed to earn the interest that was promised to you.
The problem with jobs is that the more you earn, the less you get in foodstamps, and nobody wants to risk losing their foodstamps.
So here's one of the myths that have been pushed on us for a long time: There are "the rich" and "the poor" and people stay in those groups.
My point is that if a person is stuck in a job where they must rely on Socialist Security for retirement, that's their fault.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
You're right, and it is a myth, but there's a better word for it, something like "brainwashing." Poor people need to realize that there
are ways to get out of poverty, and all they need to do is change their attitude and be ambitious. Narratives have some people fooled into thinking that it can never change, and that they're destined to eat
bread heels for the rest of their lives.
Planning ahead is smart, but sometimes people have to take things one
day at a time. If they're broke or in debt 100% of the time, there's simply no such thing as "saving for the future." They've got to (and
I'm one of these people) find a job that offers a future in the first place.
Ron L. wrote to Aaron Thomas <=-
They lack self-control and the ability to understand that decisions of consequences that they have to take.
Planning ahead is smart, but sometimes people have to take things one day at a time. If they're broke or in debt 100% of the time, there's simply no such thing as "saving for the future." They've got to (and I'm one of these people) find a job that offers a future in the first place.
They've got to take control of themselves. If they are broke or in debt all of the time, what are the odds that they drink and smoke, or
possibly do weed? Pretty high, from what I've seen.
I don't know how many relatives I've heard complain about not having the money to do necessary-thing-1 or necessary-thing-2, but they always seem to have plenty of money for their cigarettes and to go the bar.
I had too many relatives who died of cirrhosis of the liver from chronic alcahol. So my family never really did the drinking. By the time I
could explore for myself, it wasn't something that interested me.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
I think most people can balance weed, alcohol, and a checkbook. The
people who are constantly broke and are high, I think they're high on something else.
The bar thing is something that I can't relate to. Why pay more when
you can get it at Walmart way cheaper? I liked drinking with other
people when I was younger, but now days I drink alone, at home, and rarely.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
I know how people look when they're drunk, smelling like piss, all
skinny, and asking people outside the gas station for money. But I can
say with certainty that some of them aren't like that by choice.
And here's where politics plays a role in it: Psychiatrists are university-bred leftists, and they're loyal to pharmaceutical
companies.
And here's where politics plays a role in it: Psychiatrists are university-bred leftists, and they're loyal to pharmaceutical companies.
Ya, but they usually focus on the medical field to create the addiction/dependance.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
For sure. There are "experts" in every field.
And that's nothing new. I remember reading a professional article complaining about the "amateurs passing themselves off as professionals".
Then there's the usual problem of the Anointed Ones who assume that because they are an expert in Field 1, they are automatically experts in Fields 2, 3 and 4.
| Sysop: | KrAAB |
|---|---|
| Location: | Donna, TX |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 20 (0 / 20) |
| Uptime: | 241:47:28 |
| Calls: | 489 |
| Files: | 2,349 |
| D/L today: |
13 files (9,999K bytes) |
| Messages: | 43,030 |