Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

Wtf Republicans also want war with Iran? How did both parties become committed to that, you guys need to sort out your donors

Wait, I thought it was the Republicans who were the warhawks. Democrats want it too?

Warhawks is too simplistic a term, those who clamor for war are less meaningful than those who are actively waging war
Obligatory from Republican side of things
Obligatory from Democrat side of thins
However, I had hoped given Trump's vocal denunciation of Clinton's actions in Iraq, Libya and her desire to destroy Syria would have meant that Trump would have likewise purged the Republican party of its elements that pursued this agenda. It is also disturbing that both parties would pursue this agenda, meaning the US citizenry would have no alternative but to vote for the destruction of the Middle East by their hands, or the destruction of the Middle East by their hands

[smjjames]

Wtf Republicans also want war with Iran? How did both parties become committed to that, you guys need to sort out your donors

Wait, I thought it was the Republicans who were the warhawks. Democrats want it too?

I don't recall Democrats being hawkish on Iran.

Clinton is one of the more warhawky Democrats, she wasn't all out for war with Iran, but I think she left military action on the table, while the Republicans were all bloodthirsty and chomping at the bit about it. Granted, they weren't in power at the time and really didn't have anything to lose by being that, but it does send a somewhat disturbing message.

Anyways, Lindsey Graham and John McCain caved and said that they'll vote for Tillerson, so much for being Russia hawks. Rubio hasn't said anything yet, but I'm sure if it failed, they'll still try to push it to floor vote.

In all honesty, when you ignore the whole Oil CEO background, he certainly does have diplomatic experience, just of a different flavor from state based diplomacy. The real problem is both whether he'll advocate for US interests and not Exxon interests and what his relationship actually is with Russia. Yes he got a friendship medal from Putin, but that might not mean that they're slap-on-the-back-drinking-buddies.

[LoSboccacc]

last one was a true war monger but everyone's concerned about pretend scenario. you all need a good reality check XD

[smjjames]

last one was a true war monger but everyone's concerned about pretend scenario. you all need a good reality check XD

To be fair, he inherited the wars that Bush 43 did, and tried to keep us out of wars. Yes, yes, I know, Libya and all that. We do have a bit of a warmonger streak that is hard to get rid of.

[Wolfhunter107]

"Alternative facts"

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

I feel like shorting the US dollar, but I'm not exactly sure what to short it against. No good taking my earnings in said US dollar; who knows what currency won't be tanked alongside?

Bitcoins?

[Reelya]

If you bought early they were a steal. I read about a guy who bought $27 dollars worth in 2009 when he was writing a paper about cryptocurrencies, he recently remembered those were a thing and they're worth $500,000 or so at current prices.

If you'd be following even recently and had a strategy such as buy when they're < $600 and sell when they're > $1000 you'd have made a lot of money. But the problem is hindsight. While it will probably be like this for a long time you can never be sure. Traders actually like highly volatile currencies that trade in a fairly well-defined range, and Bitcoin has fit that pattern since ~2013. Basically if a currency is like that it's a money making bonanza, as long as the market itself doesn't change.

While it's possible that everyone will dump their bitcoins all at once and the price will plummet permanently, it's also kind of unlikely. There's a strong cap on the number of bitcoins that can exist so that might make them very different from typical fiat currencies which have a central bank / currency issuance and fractional reserve banking. However that could change if e.g. some financial institution was to create "bitcoin denominated loans/deposits". They would then effectively be able to credit/debit accounts in "pseudo-bitcoins", and the same issues of fractional reserve banking would start to apply. Whether or not this would stabilize or destabilize the price would be another matter.

[alway]

Buttcoins are a get rich quick scheme for chumps. Do what actual rich people do and put your money in the stock market. Actually super easy to start doing so long as you aren't day-trading; just go into a Scottrade or similar, open up an account (usually requires a minimum $500 or so), then dump the money into the stock markets. Go long on diverse stocks fundamental to the economy and you basically can't lose so long as the sociopolitical order guarantees shareholder rights over human rights. Though there is often a fixed trading fee, so you want to put in more than bare minimums generally. That's the real way to "short the dollar" and become a rent-seeking parasite.

[TheBiggerFish]

....

I see your opinions are firmly settled.

[LoSboccacc]

I tried to buy when they were after the first major drop, about 130 iirc. failed because living in Italy is closest you can get to the third world as you can get in Europe and no exchange operated there.

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

How much time do you guys spend on wall grafitti
Admittedly it's more constructive and cool than your other political endeavours for the most part

[Reelya]

http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/whats-wrong-with-donald-trumps-new-cover-photo/news-story/8d7db605d9a040c1844ed731977624a0

Eh, apparently Trump has the POTUS twitter account now. Good for him. He got new wallpaper too. Of his inauguration. Except it wasn't from his inauguration, they pilfered better photo's from Obama's inauguration. And cropped it right above the watermark. It was a copyrighted photo from a stock photo company, so it's also possibly a case of copyright infringement.

What's with this "inauguration envy"? It's fake news that Obama got bigger crowds, they copied the cake from 2008 and now they're stealing photos of Obama stuff and saying it was Trump. Add to that Trump's wife stealing Michelle Obama's speech and there's a pattern here. At the very least, Trump's personal staff is chock full of people who don't understand professional ethics and copyright law.

[Sergarr]

Trump doesn't feel like he's really as popular as Obama was and thus is aggressively trying to assert that he actually totally is.

One reason is that he's a very billionaire-rich-famous-"elitist"-type person and craves to be The Best Biggest Most Bigly League™Ū, second one is that, if his support base disappears, he's toast, quite possibly literally.

[Reelya]

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/20/14335268/obamacare-more-popular-than-trump-poll
BTW a FOX News polls found that Obamacare is more popular than Trump. Just a nice irony there.

[LoSboccacc]

after all this commotion, you all still give credits to polls? a refresher (from the '80s nontheless)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA