Last edited:
US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians
- Thread starter SeniorFuckFace
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2021
Is that Donald Glover?
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2016
I am asking, once again, for left-wing activists to please stop projecting black people onto unequivocal bad guys like FUCKING SATAN.
Miami has been the hotspot for a bunch of crypto millionaire techies after they all got fed up with San Francisco, and a group of them went to Mar a Lago once Warren started making shriek-y noises in her role as the Fed's designated attack dog. Trump swung pretty hard on the issue after a talk with them - Mike Solana said that meeting alone was more productive than hundreds of thousands in lobbying they'd been spending trying to get any traction in DC.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
I think left-wing activists may actually be pretty racist.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2020
I hate to be "that guy" but I can see how they'd boo him getting involved with crypto at all.
It's not "main character syndrome" to want the government at a minimum to stay entirely the fuck out of crypto rather than trying to "secure your rights" regarding it. I think it was Reagan, wasn't it, who said something like "the most terrifying words in the english language are 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help!'"?
I personally think it's a little autistic to be that hardline about it but I do at least understand it, if that's what got him booed.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
In a sane world, I would agree with you. However, we live in a world where its well established that unless there is a hardline "The government shall NOT" in regards to something, then one or more three letter agencies will warp their charter to encompass it, and it'll be smothered in more unelected regulation than you can shake a stick at. Even affirmative legal defense is barely enough - "Shall not be infringed" from the highest law of the land still has people wondering if what they're holding is a legal pistol, an illegal rifle, a terroristic assault weapon, or all three depending on which agent is looking at it today.
At least affirmative laws means there's more points of resistance and defense when they try to fuck with it.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2020
Gonna go one layer deeper and ask what you think Trump can accomplish wrt crypto. Because if the answer is anything other than "executive order" I'll remind you that it'll involve congress, in which case it'll %100 be a bill that contains some poison pill or another that makes the situation worse than if it'd been left alone.
And if it's an E.O. that's allowed to stay it sets precedent for the next guy to fuck with crypto from the oval office right after he wipes his ass with Trump's protective order regarding it.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2021
Actually, they seem to be incapable of doing anything even remotely productive. But I agree with ending the gravy train for them. People on welfare shouldn’t be able to afford $300 Lebron James basketball shoes, new big screen tv’s, and the latest Xbox or PS.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Same thing that any president can do, exactly as you point out, to work with congress to draft legislation. The trick to the poison pill is you at least get to chose your poison. Considering how the state of the next four years is probably gonna look programs and revenues wise, its very plausible that positive crypto legislation might come at a cost as low as more pork barrel spending. Y'all get to replace that bridge the pajeets redeemed with a DEI sized budget, and self-custody of crypto gets legally assured. Cali takes another stupid pile of cash to pump drugs and fried chicken into niggers, and wallet to wallet crypto transactions get codified as legal without exchange involvement or oversight.
It'd be preferable to not have any of that shit, surely, but that shit is still preferable over major legislative positioning. It helps a great deal that the interested parties in the crypto space are various levels of smaller parties, and simple financial interests - There's no major risk of turning away voters, and the financial interests just want a Crypto space that continues staying just a little volatile so their offerings and services both look more stable as competition, and can skim off the fluctuations for profit. Very few people in the political space have much of anything to gain for hardline crusading against it, so palms will be easily greased for it.
Really shows how fucked the system is when the best argument for why it'll work is "It'll be easy to be corrupt around it without raising eyebrows" though.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2020
Regulating it into stock market 2.0 is a very lucrative if equally evil incentive that's been slowly playing out for the past five years from what little I've kept track of the situation around its legality and regulatory status.
I feel like it's a good time to point out that my view of if Trump supports crypto or not is that it doesn't really matter at the end of the day, I'm just pointing out the likely thinking behind why he'd get booed at that specific remark regarding crypto regulation. I personally, genuinely don't think crypto-currency and whether or not it's regulated into being a part of the exact monster it was meant to circumvent will ultimately matter much.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2021
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
For the election as a whole, absolutely. Like I said, too few voters that would consider it anywhere close to a deciding policy factor. Does give Trump some positive news cycle just to talk about it though. Won't change many minds, but it'll reinforce the sentiment of him being people first, government second.
Personally, I do think regulating Crypto into a controlled pressure release is probably the best way to go. Completely CBDC it and cripple it and the userbase just moves on. Instead, codify its best aspects in a way that also brings them to light (Self custody, public transaction records, KYC for exchanges) enough to catch the worst of the abuses. Money goes there because it wants to scam, be scammed, or for ideological opposition to the alternatives. Better to make it the devil you know, as opposed to have people make the next, potentially more malicious alternatives.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2019
IANAL, but isn't this like saying you could be found guilty of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person without having to prove they are in fact a prohibited person (to draw on recent crackets as an example)?
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2022
It's amazing how seamlessly these creatures just lie with a smile. She asks "why is this shit so bad?" and the faggot effortlessly pivots to throwing numbers and excuses.
If your plan is to have those stations "by 2030" when given the speed you already failed.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
It's like saying that you committed 2nd degree murder on a guy who killed himself by scarfing speedballs.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2016
He didn't even do a great job explaining the Official Reason. If you've farmed these funds out to all the state governments and they're setting up the programs to build out that infrastructure, name drop a few of them. Point out which states are setting it up in a way the national party particularly likes. Explain why the few that already got built were done so ahead of schedule, if we aren't meant to see results until towards the end of the decade (
).Buttigieg just going all mealy-mouthed about it suggests Democrats are doing that thing they always do where they pass massive infrastructure projects and use the funds as a piggy bank for all the stuff that won't pass a vote (when it isn't outright graft), or he genuinely isn't aware of the details behind the DoT's effort to implement the charging infrastructure (which, given how asleep at the switch he always is in his role as Transport Secretary, I have to consider as at least a possibility).
spinal gas chamber
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 19, 2020
Or pump it full of nerve gas for like two months.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
Maybe they can build another set of lines parallel to the old ones! surely that hasn't been tried before.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2020
"Show me the man and I won't show you the crime." - Judge Juan
"Sheeeit nigga why didn't we think of that? It's perfect *chef's kiss*" - the NKVD
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Now I'm not usually super keen on any "The judge should lose their job for this" style arguments because its usually ignorant of how broad a judges powers can be, but goddamn if that doesn't walk right along that line if not straight up cross it. Its one thing to let the prosecution get away with some wild shit, you can handwave it as "Appeal will deal with it, I felt it more important to facilitate the full presentation of evidence and cases to avoid any surprises.". But its another thing entirely for the judge to provide jury instructions that aren't just illegal by circumstance, but are actively and explicitly the opposite of the exact writings of what is legal to do, at the most basic of levels. That's absolutely fucking wild.
Which makes me really wonder just what's driving the judge at this point. This isn't just a career plateau move where you're never gonna go past that, this is an active career killer where you lose your job and do so under the kinds of conditions that all but guarantee you never have a career in that field again. Either the TDS is terminal in the most literal sense, or someone has either a very powerful bribe or blackmail over them that makes career suicide preferable to the alternatives, positively or negatively.
- Status