Yeah, it's weird.

Whenever I note in the Trump thread that he's committing a chunk of his own administration to oversee a hundred million dollar push for global women's empowerment and faggot protection everyone just gets emotional and plays the man instead of the ball.

Is Yang proposing to spend MORE than Trump's 100 million dollars on global crusade for women's empowerment and faggot protection?

I don't know if Yang's a pedophile but he sure doesn't seem to care as deeply for faggots as Trump does.

Really gets the noggin joggin'.

Yang killing it on Morning Joe.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/d..._3096433-p

Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, Morning Joe, Sam Harris, Fox Business: I love how he crosses ideological divides to reach as wide an audience as possible. #securethebag

Quote: (03-18-2019 10:21 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Yeah, it's weird.

Whenever I note in the Trump thread that he's committing a chunk of his own administration to oversee a hundred million dollar push for global women's empowerment and faggot protection everyone just gets emotional and plays the man instead of the ball.

Is Yang proposing to spend MORE than Trump's 100 million dollars on global crusade for women's empowerment and faggot protection?

I don't know if Yang's a pedophile but he sure doesn't seem to care as deeply for faggots as Trump does.

Really gets the noggin joggin'.

Yep, the pandering to women sucks, but hey, they passed women's suffrage 100 years ago and here we are today.

The whole push for gays nonsense is also to appease women. This is obviously recommended by Ivanka and Trump trusts his daughter on winning female votes.

I have no idea how you can think a fag is worse than a pedo though.

Quote:Quote:

Yeah, it's weird.

Whenever I note in the Trump thread that he's committing a chunk of his own administration to oversee a hundred million dollar push for global women's empowerment and faggot protection everyone just gets emotional and plays the man instead of the ball.

Is Yang proposing to spend MORE than Trump's 100 million dollars on global crusade for women's empowerment and faggot protection?

I don't know if Yang's a pedophile but he sure doesn't seem to care as deeply for faggots as Trump does.

Really gets the noggin joggin'.

Trump's always been a liberal New Yorker (And honestly it's very possible that we should've looked at his ties with Jeff "Lolita Express"" Epstein a little closer than any of us did.) So this kind of stuff was to be expected. I would gladly let Ivanka have some pocket change to go promote "Women's Empowerment" if it meant getting the 10-feet-higher version of a border wall, but no wall AND no Obamacare repeal AND not even a token effort to fight the tech companies, and I'm still supposed to fork over tax dollars so Daddy's Little Nepotist can go be a strong empowered woman? Fuck that.


I'll take my Yangbucks instead, please.

A lot of people forget Trump was mentored by a homosexual degenerate who later died of AIDS (Roy Cohn). And Trump himself admitted to attending some fucked up orgies in the 70s and 80s. That's not an attack on his character, but if we're gonna play the guilt-by-association game with Yang then we have to be fair about any other politician as well.

Quote: (03-18-2019 11:23 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

...
Yep, the pandering to women sucks, but hey, they passed women's suffrage 100 years ago and here we are today.

The whole push for gays nonsense is also to appease women. This is obviously recommended by Ivanka and Trump trusts his daughter on winning female votes.

I have no idea how you can think a fag is worse than a pedo though.

Trump wins the election on the wall, deportation of bad hombres and "no longer surrendering to the false song of globalism" but now he has to save fags globally and empower women globally to get the votes he needs?

Wherever you are, you need to stop drinking the tap water. You weren't this dissonant 12 months ago.

I'm not even fucking kidding, bro. This is not just some off-the-cuff insult to rustle your jimmies. When I read this stuff you're posting and compare it to the stuff prior to your absence it's like you've been in a car accident or had a stroke or something. My first guess was literally that your account had been grabbed by an alphabet soup agency.

Quote:Quote:

Trump wins the election on the wall, deportation of bad hombres and "no longer surrendering to the false song of globalism" but now he has to save fags globally and empower women globally to get the votes he needs?

Always been this way. The pandering to gays and women was constant during 2016, because he had the male vote on lockdown. He was constantly pushing how he'd protect gays whereas the left would let in radical muslims that oppressed them, etc.

Ultimately the gay vote only matters to women, most men do not vote based on it, but plenty of women will vote on their feels based on how stuff like fags, animals, and abortion are handled.

Trust me I don't like it, and Yang will not only push the gay stuff but possibly the pedo stuff too.

So does anyone have any metrics on whats going to happen in the next 6 months or is this going to be a massive clusterfuck?

What's going to happen with the what now?

Yang will go to the debates, where he may or may not break out. I'm thinking yes because in a crowded field the guy who gets the most attention will win, and Yang's gonna get a lot attention thanks to his memester crew tweeting about it constantly. (Normal people don't read twitter, but journalists read twitter, and then journalists write articles that normal people read. This was what happened with Trump)

Who else are people gonna talk about? Boring o'Rourke? Bernie Sanders again (Like last time, but now even older and with even less energy!)

Make that 15 months to go for the DNC clown cluster show...

"The 2020 Democratic National Convention is an event in which delegates of the United States Democratic Party will choose the party's nominees for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The convention is scheduled to be held from July 13–16, 2020, at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democ...Convention

Heh.
A subtle reminder for the final DNC clown that Wisconsin exists.

Slightly creepy, but hey, still positive!

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/Jasmin_Chairez/status/1106960173317292032][/url]

Quote:Quote:

I'm not even fucking kidding, bro. This is not just some off-the-cuff insult to rustle your jimmies. When I read this stuff you're posting and compare it to the stuff prior to your absence it's like you've been in a car accident or had a stroke or something. My first guess was literally that your account had been grabbed by an alphabet soup agency.

I believe I am largely consistent with my posting style and beliefs from a year ago.

Quote: (03-18-2019 04:46 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:Quote:

3. You don't understand how a VAT works in-combination with a UBI. It's not about forcing rich people to spend nor dependent solely on them spending, it's about giving more disposable income to regular people and encouraging the turning of the economic engine. Turning economic engine = good for everyone including rich people; if not financially, at least from a physical safety perspective. The rich in this country are very scared of a revolt and people coming for them. They know the kettle is boiling and about to pop if pushed much further. Look at Amazon HQ2 in New York as a recent example of non-violent revolt, that could boil over into burning buildings down and/or targeting CEOs very quickly if they can't feed their family.

You've consistently ignored the economic criticisms of a VAT tax mentioned in this thread by myself and many others. People aren't going to take you seriously if you don't have a honest debate, and you won't get anyone to vote for your guy on this board.

To be fair, we haven't seen exactly how the VAT tax would be implemented. Yang isn't that specific on his site or when he talks about it.

If we put the vat on EVERYTHING, then sure, it would hit poor people the hardest. BUT if we don't tax things like food, and essentials like diapers, household goods and whatnot, and only put a vat on luxury goods, then it would essentially be a wealth tax, or wealth transfer.

OR if his first proposal does not pass through congress and he has to go back and make revisions, to get it passed, then maybe it doesn't hurt poor people at all. A few times Yang has said VAT would be used to tax the robot companies and amazon, UBER and whatnot. That might sound well and good but he would need a much broader vat tax than just hitting the robot companies.

He also says he wants to increase immigration. If we are about to kill 30 million jobs, it seems like a bad idea to not be trying to increase immigration at the same time.

Quote:Quote:

He also says he wants to increase immigration. If we are about to kill 30 million jobs, it seems like a bad idea to not be trying to increase immigration at the same time.

Unlimited immigration and $1000/month. MATH!

Well, Yang hasn't outright said it, but he has to know that a lot of guys can live on 1000 dollars a month. If you go to Wyoming and rent a 1 bedroom for 400/month, pay 200 a month on food, and then you have 400 in profit... A lot of guys just won't work and leech off of the system.


So bring in immigrants who will not get UBI for another 18 years to do the shit work. I guess that's his plan?


The big winners in UBI will be couples(the woman can stay at home and raise a child while the man works), single men(and extra 12k per year to start up your small business. The big losers: women on welfare and food stamps that are already getting over 1000 in benefits will get nothing from UBI. They may have to pay slightly more for some items depending on what VAT taxes hit.


I guess my concern is that now landlords will charge more for rent. People can afford it now!

Quote: (03-18-2019 08:06 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

Slightly creepy, but hey, still positive!

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/Jasmin_Chairez/status/1106960173317292032][/url]

How apt.

His dissertion about truckers and accidents on the Joe Rogan Podcast leads me to believe he's going about this wrong, my brother is a truck driver and the data he says is that cars are at fault for~90% of the accidents out there involving trucks. I'm afraid his data is either mistaken or intentionally skewering the information for an agenda, I do like that he does give a shit about the working man and automation wrecking shit for 40% of the population

Some (relatively) positive exposure to Yang credit of 538.com

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1108031961992495105][/url]

It's a pretty skeptical piece, but regardless, the more exposure Yang has, the better his odds.

Quote: (03-17-2019 05:09 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

[quote] (03-15-2019 11:07 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  

(03-16-2019, 02:34 AM)wi30 Wrote:  [quote='Deepdiver' pid='1952754' dateline='1552674365']
Own Physical Gold and Silver: These precious metals are the ultimate safe-haven assets. We hold them for the long term.

All due respect, but if you're afraid of a socialist collapse of civilisation, physical gold is about the worst "safe haven" asset you can buy. The native Americans rightly called it the yellow metal that drives men mad.

The reason is this: y'really think AOC and her friends won't have figured that strategy out by the time they rule the roost? You don't think they'll come for your gold?

After all, they have the US's own history to draw on. Read up on a piece of legislation called the Gold Confiscation Act, passed 1933 while FDR was in government and horribly mismanaging the attempt to recover from the Depression (and making it actually worse). The law required all US citizens to hand over to the government via the banks almost all gold coins (US and foreign), bullion (bars, nuggets, dust, etc) and gold certificates within a few weeks after the order was issued. A short eight months after the confiscation a new piece of Federal legislation, the Gold Reserve Act, was enacted. The Gold Reserve Act revalued gold versus the dollar. In theory, a 1934 $20 gold coin would then be equivalent to 35 paper dollars.

Every last seizure of physical gold under this Act was held as Constitutional by the US Supreme Court.

Americans were not permitted to own physical gold again until 1974. If economic disaster happens and President AOC thinks a significant number of people are hoarding wealth in gold, she'll revive this Act faster than a virgin cums on first insertion.

Most significantly: while you can own gold again, there remains a parallel ban that you cannot have a gold clause in a contract, i.e. make an agreement or contract where you get paid in physical gold rather than US dollars. It is literally illegal for you to make a contract where you agree to get paid in gold rather than US dollars. That is, your gold ain't going to be worth jack shit if it comes to real disasters and you start offering ingots for food. Never mind you'll be like a Ferrari owner handing over his Ferrari for a bag of potatoes, the Feds will be coming a day later to arrest your ass and take whatever gold you've got left -- most likely under the auspices of some form of proceeds of crime legislation, which is currently used to rape lots of weed smokers across the US.

Oh, and don't think silver is any great haven, either. FDR seized that, too, under Executive Order 6814, which mirrored the one he'd issued to seize the gold as well.

Own physical gold anywhere within the US, or in any body that answers to US law outside the US, and you are making yourself a standing target.

Where do I start - let me just say your post is as preposterous as it is erroneous and I resent people who take a small fragment of a detailed post in order to make a predetermined point that fits their limited agenda. My post provided a very diversified and detailed set of profit options and solutions to the Socialists Tsunami about to break upon North American shores. IIRC Gold and Silver Coin Collections were determined to be numismatics and exempt from Globalist Roosevelt's unconstitutional seizure 90 Years Ago - proof I have many late 1800's and early 1900s 90% silver coins clearly were not seized and melted down ...

Here is the full scope summary of solutions from my TLDR yet extensive post of useful knowledge to survive and thrive in the coming CCP inspired Socialists Wave...

Gold is a small perhaps 5 to 10 percent of this overall diversified strategy....

Best coins are US and Canadian Mint .999 and .9999 One once Silver and Gold Coins and a strategy to hide them as well as Pre 1964 US Coins... Given the new Political Divides in the USA seizing Gold and Silver and Cryptos and Cash would be as Revolution triggering as demands to remove our 2nd and 1st Amendments and seize our firearms. Not Gonna Happen... We are not UK, Australia or New Zealand.

Full Scope:

The Casey Report Top Themes

Own Physical Gold and Silver: These precious metals are the ultimate safe-haven assets. We hold them for the long term.

The End of Marijuana Prohibition: Legalization is inevitable. It’s happening. And it’s going to unleash a $150 billion market that was previously underground. Those profits are up for grabs.

The Collapse of Western Civilization: There’s major turmoil ahead for Western Civilization… and it could be catastrophic for global currency and stock markets.

The Most Hated of the Resource Markets: There is simply no other commodity with more explosive upside and less downside than uranium right now.

Dividend Aristocrats: A goose that lays an ever-increasing number of golden eggs. We own them for safe, steady profits. It’s hard to think of a better investment.

The Death of America’s Middle Class: The shrinking middle class is looking at a rising drawbridge. You’ll either make it to the other side of the moat, and live comfortably inside the castle. Or you will be stuck outside with the peasants, a member of the permanent underclass.

The New Crisis Currency: Bitcoin is a disruptive and transformative technology that provides a genuine alternative to the unsound financial system. It allows the average person the ability to escape the collapsing fiat matrix.

The Third Oil Shock: A big conflict in the Middle East often triggers a big spike in the price of oil. Take the 1973 “oil shock,” for example. Oil prices roughly quadrupled in a matter of weeks. Today, we could be on the verge of a price spike even more extreme than that.

The Casey Report Model Portfolio
RECENT PRICES

Core Positions
InvestmentOpen DateOpen PriceDist/AdjRecent PriceTrailing Stop %ReturnsNotes
First Majestic Silver (AG)11/09/16$9.38$0.00$6.6257%-29.4%Buy up to $15
Bitcoin (BTC/USD)06/14/18$6300.12$0.00$3871.79-38.5%Buy up to $28,000
Repsol (REPYY)08/09/18$19.85$0.00$16.9450%-14.7%Buy up to $30
Sinopec (SNP)09/13/18$96.61$0.00$83.7450%-13.3%Buy up to $130
Aurora Cannabis (ACB)07/25/18$2.43$0.00$8.99270.0%Buy Up to $12
The ProShares Short High Yield (SJB)01/10/19$22.77$0.00$22.1350%-2.8%Buy Up to $30
Kirkland Lake Gold (KL)02/14/19$32.53$0.00$34.3450%5.6%Buy up to $40
Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS)03/14/19$10.57$0.00$10.4850%-0.9%Buy up to $15
Wheaton Precious Metals (WPM)07/12/18$22.14$0.09$21.9450%-0.4%Buy up to $30
ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF)12/13/18$23.12$0.09$22.5050%-2.3%Buy up to $30
ProShares UltraShort S&P500 (SDS)11/08/18$35.12$0.18$33.9950%-2.8%Buy
Cameco (CCJ)07/12/17$9.61$0.22$12.2229.4%Buy
Suncor Energy (SU)10/11/18$37.36$0.59$33.6350%-9.1%Buy up to $60
Walmart (WMT)05/11/18$82.69$1.57$98.2250%20.1%Buy up to $110
Exxon Mobil (XOM)06/14/18$81.51$2.46$80.4450%0.8%Buy up to $100
*A stop loss is a predetermined price at which you will sell a stock if it declines. Reduce the stop-loss trigger price by any dividends received. Only use closing prices to determine whether a position has hit its trailing stop.

Please keep track of stop losses on stocks you own. If a stock hits its stop, we’ll write about it in our next monthly issue. However, we will not send out alerts between issues. It’s your responsibility to monitor your portfolio and follow the stop losses we suggest.

This sheet represents our current portfolio recommendations and is not a comprehensive track record.

Reference date is the release date of the publication when the recommendation was originally made.

You know, I used to think UBI was the most spectacularly dumb idea ever. And to a certain extent I still do.

But I have to give props to Yang for making it sound very, very reasonable (and perhaps it actually is reasonable)

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1108185513645821952][/url]

EDIT: I've been pinging some of my American friends (millenials mostly) who either hated both Trump and Clinton or were on the fence about Trump.

Everyone's been very positive about Yang, with the only concern being whether he can actually win.

I don't want to start an entire "the Boomers fucked the millenials" conversation, but it is fascinating to see what happens when you send out a generation with a boatload of debt and extremely bleak job opportunities...

and then a guy shows up saying: "Let's just start off with $1,000 per month for everyone"

Most of my friends are doing fine, but I'd be lying if I didn't say the married couples would really appreciate the extra $24K per year to get a family started.

Yang is making a very persuasive case and I'm surprised Scott Adams isn't raving about him.

Yang2020.com actually sold black "MATH" hats



sold out first run in 30 minutes

Yang definitely has the momentum right now

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/Kainec92/status/1108177798303236097][/url]

Jeez, who'd have thought the blackpill could make guys want to fake laughter.

Or maybe one has to be blackpill to understand the memes?

Someone please let me know, I've got a real bad case of FOMO over here

Yang is economically illiterate. He's just a lot better than Bernie at making it seems he's not; and that he's a very reasonable guy.

Yang talks about making the economy grow by giving people money that they will then spend. If that was the magic bullet, everyone would be using it. He talks about giving money to people to spend on beer and going restaurants. Claiming this will boost the economy.

It won't. Beer is economically destructive. There is an investment in making a bottle of beer; and nothing else is created in the economy because of its existence or utility. Economic growth and your living standards depend on the constant creation and maintenance of things that can produce other things.

There are things that have historically been wildly economically productive, because of their existence and utility a lot more things end up being produced (with less input). Examples are the printing press, typewriter, PCs, search engines, washing machines etc. One of the issues today is the creative process is now skewing towards deranged art, fap tube, social media sink holes and binge watching sinister TV shows made by pedophiles and rapists.

But Yang and his cadres are all about moving capital that could be used for production and burning it all on the consumption and leisure of their voters.

The way he talks about this is the same as Bernie. He says if you just move money here (towards people who produce little, if anything) then things will be produced all of a sudden.

Money is a fascia for goods and services. He talks about this like money is a magic wand if used correctly. It's not. He's effectively just moving goods and services around, which skews prices.

Only to further show how Yang and the new wave socialists are completely clueless. There are aspects of the economy where people are gaining from little or no productive work. Beyond welfare queens there are speculators who make masses of money from the back of production, while producing nothing. The speculation industry costs billions just to run and produces nothing. This would be a sensible angle to go after people on and could lead to some economic reforms that would help most people. But they don't know what they're talking about. They just know oppressor – oppressed manipulation. A big difference with Yang over Ocasio-Cortez is that Yang puts a sheen of niceness and aspiration on the same policies; over Ocasio-Cortez's overt and fiery oppression narratives.

In Britain the possible future finance minister and known adult Marxist, John MaoDonnell, proposes among many other things as spending $70 billion / year on building houses for ten years. Saying “It will pay for itself.” Yang is able to spin out the same economically untenable shit without using language that makes him seem like he's talking about a magic money tree. But a quick scratch of the surface and Yang is no different.

Economics is essentially an extension of physics. Just as the Soviets and all the others tried to control prices, you can't magically destruct or create energy. But that is what these people think they can do.

On the $70 billion / year for houses; the architects of this idea say that it borrowing all that money will grow the economy. If that was the case the private sector would be all over making these huge potential profits. The borrowed economic activity will create a bigger economy. But you don't grow an economy by jacking one area. It's unnatural and as soon as you pull the stimulus the new economy that sprung up will wither away, leaving you with a big debt.

On UBI. We don't need any more UBI experiments. We've had people living on $1,000 / month of government welfare for decades. We know the outcome. They don't suddenly become all inspired and start businesses or write symphonies. They don't do much or they get a job. And they don't create a great new economy with that welfare money. The money comes from someone else's production and it's given to people on welfare to subsist. What they spend goes to virtually 100% subsistence – all destruction, nothing created. Whereas if it was left in the economy a large portion would go on producing other things. UBI is a rebrand of an untenable system.

There is no room for socialism. One of the reasons why socialism was such a failure is the places it was tried had little wealth to socialise in the first place. For all kinds of reasons, wealth per capita is shrinking in The West and the only way to get out of that is accept it or produce more – like people working more hours or becoming economically literate and figuring out what they can produce that will allow someone else to produce something else and so on.

The West was able to jack up big welfare states over the last several decades due to a number of favourable circumstances as far as the economy was concerned. The economy grew enough to be able to shear off production and cycle it down to the bottom of society. It made everyone poorer, but you could say you were looking after the poor and making things more equal.

There is little more room for this, especially in Europe. The UK economy is nominally smaller than it was in 2008. And that's with 3 million more people in the country. Real wages are down about £2,000. The mainstream says little of this as the mainstream is full of people who have never done anything, known nothing and have no working solutions. Ripping from the productive end of a shrinking economy can only go on for so long. It's what the socialists did. Social democracy might have two times the lifespan of socialism.

But I think it's inevitable that The West will have multiple socialist-esque experiments over the coming two decades. It's something that needs to be got out of the system.