jimbilly22

20 ms·

1.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
same way it's always done. Pick and choose enforcement based on whims, political opponents or anyone otherwise whom they target.
2.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
mixed feelings because it's under 18, and therefore you dont feel that freedom of self is as important? Would you feel differently if this was for adults?
3.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
apart from freedom...just a little human right. no biggie.
4.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
I think that's fair, it just depends on what frame we are arguing in. Because the motivation of a lot of the people arguing for "raising taxes on the rich" is to indeed leave the curve altogether. Will small increases or decr
5.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
Here's one small example that I found illuminating and funny. Bezos (a major political donor) lost a NASA contract for 10 billion to SpaceX. He freaked So the US Senate, looking out for their buddy, simply added the 10 billion to their
6.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
I used to work in PE (private equity), very common there. One daily DoorDash lunch order, put anything you want.
7.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
At the end of the day, from a macro perspective, it's going to come down to the "war for talent". Businesses with the best talent, over time, win; those without, lose. As so, this is the most pertinent part of the article: &q
8.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
agreed, that is certainly the most noteworthy aspect. I can't say im surprised. Financial hegemony is critical for state apparatuses to maintain power. Frankly I'm more surprised it's taken them this long to begin the crusade
9.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
in the short term perhaps. In the long term, countries with less regulated markets have better economic outcomes. Nearly the entire first-world has adopted the US model of economics. People forget that at one time it was radical.
10.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
yea. they media knows exactly what they are doing when they zero on those metrics. It's part of a larger ideological push. It's extremely disingenuous.
11.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
the argument is simply that going to the farmer's market for local produce, then going on a ski trip to Chile doesn't equal out, doesn't make you a climate warrior, and doesn't make you better than anyone else -- even if
12.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
it's a good move.
13.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
This is spot on. The only wrinkle -- Twitter could actually do something to create separate communities if they wanted. Some large investors have asked them to. They've drafted up plans to create a separate space for financial discussi
14.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
this argument is used to justify literally every climate hypocrisy, from pro skiers to billionaires on down "i do X high-carbon thing to bring awareness to the plebs"
15.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
Twitter hasnt even attempted. It's the opposite. They amplify the polarizing content through their trending feed. They love it.
16.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
sure. they wont though.
17.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
It is. Their advertising is extremely strictly regulated and literally all of their ads and marketing material focus on smoking cessation. Note: this came after initial warnings from the FDA years ago that they were going to ban the product
18.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
it is, generally, yes. But what shapes companies in the long-term is the degree in which they can stem this natural tendency. I.E. Amazon vs Kodak. Blockbuster vs Best Buy
19.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
Nope. This is simply factually incorrect. Take the Pennsylvania constitution, written also in 1776 (by many of the same authors, as we know, as the federal constitution). They also have a "2a" clause. Below: "That the people
20.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
A boxing heavybag. The best stress reliever imaginable.
21.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
no, it isnt. you asked for when a hedge fund was bailed out by a bank. i gave you one. there's many more. that's just the most famous example.
22.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
Off the top, Bear Stearns bailed out its main hedge fund after it had to liquidate in what ended up being a precursor to the financial crisis. It happens fairly often.
23.
by jimbilly22 5y ago
Long Term Capital Management was bailed out by the government. Or, the Fed organized it. They ended up leveraged 100 to 1 and had trillions in bonds.