search results matching tag: 50s

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.004 seconds

    Videos (1000)     Sift Talk (144)     Blogs (211)     Comments (1000)   

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

bobknight33 says...

Currently holding 1400 shares.

With the current depressed price it is a fantastic buying opportunity. Lots of shit all all around but nothing has changed with Tesla.


Highly volatile stock but think long term of 5+ years.
Tesla stated goal to grow 50% every year. They have been doing this. Last year 2021 84% growth in vehicles.


I tell friends to buy and expect a loss ( big swings day to day) buy to hold and focus on the long game.


Who else owns Tesla shares?

As I've posted previously, If you want to see how fast change can happen watch this.


Watch The Tesla Plaid Go 0-160 MPH

newtboy says...

For new cars, probably correct, but old combustion engines aren’t just going to dissolve away. I have two over 50 years old in my driveway. They can last a long time.
Also, India and China don’t seem very interested in skipping their turn at combustion engines (sad), so tack 50+- years on before the entire world even really wants to switch over.

I don’t deny average electric vehicles should soon outperform average normal gas engines (let’s ignore exotics as exotics). My point is switching technology across the board is a slow, painful, expensive process that won’t likely happen in 5, 10, or even 20 years IMO….and electric motors won’t ever totally replace combustion for all applications as some suggest.

vil said:

Yes and no. For private personal transportation in first world countries a decade sounds about right, two decades at most. Unless there is some disruptive event.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

bobknight33 says...

I said this before.

In broad terms...

Endless welfare is wrong,
I'm also against 40+ years of Social security- Its a pyramid scheme.


Should be 1 system where all get say 15 years of benefits.
Should be able to take it a monthly amounts.

Should not be able to start collecting till at least 25. This will make you get a job, get skills and become less dependent.


If you 30 and have a kid and want to take 6 months off then deduct it from those 15 years.

if 50 and burned out. take a year off go to school or such and refresh. Deduct that from you 15 years. Now you have 14.

You get in a wreck and laid up for a year, loose you job, no problem. Use 1 of your years.


I dont want strings if you want to buy drugs, travel, or go to school does not matter.

When you 65 and only have 8 years left of benefits your should keep working. Maybe taking a lessor job. maybe take those 8 years at full rate take it at 1/2 rate as a supplement.


Its you life you know what you need not government.

Also in general, This should not apply to , mental illness patients and those who truly can not function on their own. or their care takers if family members.

Republicans aren't assholes we just don't want chronic dependence.

newtboy said:

How extremely unRepublican of you.

No strings, no hoops, no “no help until you get a job” type of nonsense!?
Who is this? You are aware all those strings and hoops are Republican additions to welfare laws, right?

Second, a set time limit for those on warfare!?! (I must assume that means companies that are part of the military industrial complex, riding high on that sweet sweet government cheese)

Holy shit, that’s pretty damn far left of you. Congratulations! I’m seriously impressed, and fully back that plan. If your business is making tools for war, it shouldn’t be a private business, it should be a department in the DOD. America doesn’t like war profiteering….or so we claim.

👏

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

bcglorf says...

I'm gonna have to be that guy. $500 a month for a family of four is $2k, which is a very good chunk of money to drop in your lap.

That works out the same as it they were on a single income, working 40 hour weeks at $10/hr, so almost equivalent to a full time job. No doubt that's gonna be a big deal and noticeable financial improvement to the recipient(s).

As always with UBI schemes, the devil is in how you pay for it. If it's truly universal, paying $500/month to ~330 million Americans would cost $1.98 Trillion dollars, meanwhile the current entire US gov budget for 2022 is estimated at $1.2 Trillion.

So, to implement $500/month universally in America would require not only increasing overall tax revenues by almost 50% it would also require the cancellation of 100% of every single other expenditure. That not includes military spending going to zero, but even cancelling the jobs of everyone that collects taxes and would presumably have been responsible for distributing the $500 checks.

If the 'fix' is to just tax the pants off anyone earning more than the $500/month, or limiting who we give it to, then it ceases to be a UBI scheme, and is instead just a mundane modification of the existing social security scheme by shuffling more money back and forth between different folks.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Holy fuck!
Remember Hillary?
Remember how she should be locked up for using a private server for digital copies of official government documents?

Uh oh….Trump not only also did exactly that, but he actually stole original (uncopied, with no digital copy) documents from the whitehouse, including but not limited to presidential records, personal notes, correspondence with foreign leaders, government records…. The national archive had to raid Maralago to retrieve what was left unincinerated (yes, he burned records that he stole from the whitehouse).
He allegedly actually ate some records in the Oval Office so they couldn’t be retrieved and put back together like so many were.
Another instance of Trump being ridiculously guilty of far more of the exact criminal activity that he asserted his opponent might commit and should definitely be executed for.

P.S. How about those jobs numbers!? Not the 300000 jobs lost Fox and co have been gleefully telegraphing for weeks, but nearly 500000 gained, and more people reentering the workforce thanks to a healthy economy! Thanks Biden!

On a personal note, Biden debt relief programs just erased $59k of student debt my mother in law has been paying off for nearly 50 years (she became severely ill and was out of work for years….twice, and all progress she had made paying it off was erased with penalties and interest). Thanks again Biden!

New Rule: First Lady Barack Obama | Real Time (HBO)

newtboy says...

Lol. Triggered much bob!?

Impossible to enlighten you, you live in the dark by choice.

No matter how often or how clearly I explain my feelings on Biden, 20 minutes later you will post “newt, you good think time Biden you boy good!? Explain why you love him. This is you choice?”

There’s no point explaining for a fifteenth time to a moron that can’t read my reply and can’t remember an answer for 3 minutes.

🤦‍♂️

On the other hand, Trump IS 100% you(r) choice, despite all the lies, despite the massive failures on every front, despite adding 50%+ to the debt, despite the worst economy in history, despite being responsible for 750000 American deaths, despite the racist race baiting and scapegoating politics, dispite the most nepotistic administration ever, despite the dissolution of the union, despite letting Russia invade Crimea and murder their political enemies internationally without a word, despite dozens of failed attempts to subvert democracy, defraud an election, outright steal the presidency, use the military to seize voting machines and install fake electors to “elect” him, sell pardons, and despite his being best friends and a long time party partner with Epstein, filmed lecherously leering and gawking at children at multiple events including Maralago parties with just him, Jeff, and dozens of under age girls in attendance and no one else.

Yes, Bob. Biden is incredibly better than Trump, no comparison, it’s a mid level AAA ball player vs a cheater and loser at T-ball. It’s an old fashioned grandpa vs Charles Manson. He doesn’t have to be Hank Arron to be a massive improvement over a cheater who bats 000 and has 4217 errors in 4 seasons and no plays (but claims to be the best player ever).

Could you explain what positive traits you see in Trump? What success he had (without ignoring 2020)? In what way specifically was the nation better off Jan 19 2021 than it was in late 2016?

How are you going to answer with OAN going away? No more canned insane fact free answers for you to cut and paste.

bobknight33 said:

If you best idea is Obama marrying Biden clearly Dems are screwed.


OK @newtboy show me yet another of your pointless pedantic response on why Biden is so great. Enlighten me.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

Original slinky commercial

Original slinky commercial

snake eating itself

newtboy says...

Excuse me?!
Control of all three?! Executive, legislative, and judicial? What?!

How exactly do you think a 3-6 minority in the Supreme Court is control?
How is a 48/50/2 split in the senate with two independents and two Democrats (that you mentioned) being Republican in all but their claimed party, always voting against their party and with Republicans, “control”?

I would say it’s barely even a 50/50 split, Dems have the white-house and house, Republicans have the senate and courts. That really puts Republicans in control of 2/3 since they have veto power in the senate and use it every time for any democratic bill.

cloudballoon said:

True enough. But with Manchin & Sinema, the Dems aren't doing much better to have laurels to rest on either. It just projects a whole lot of incompetence & re-enforce the frustrations and distrust Americans (and many allies) have and an easy target for ruling autocrats to laugh at. Surey that's not what people voted Biden AND control (albeit bare-bone) of all 3 branches of gov't to the Dems for...

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

bobknight33 says...

To say that Republicans are politicizing the supreme court is nonsense. Democrats pick left leaning and Republicans pick right leaning. This is not new. Where were your complaints of politicizing when Sotomayor or Kagen were appointed?

But if you want to go there it started with Senator Ted Kennedy within minutes of Bork being picked by POTUS Reagen to be appointed took to the floor of the senate and thrown down the gauntlet.


They may be lean more conservative today however Its been leaning left last 50 years.

The fact that cases are now before the court is because some conservatives feel there is a chance to have their cases win.

Why bring these case before the supreme court if you know you would have a high likely to loose. All the cost time and effort.


WRT to the abortion issue .If overturned it just means that the decision goes back to the states.


Overturning a previous opinions has occurred and will occur in the future .

Is Meat REALLY Bad For The Climate?

newtboy says...

A 2012 United Nations report summarized 65 different estimated maximum sustainable population size and the most common estimate was 8 billion. Advocates of reduced population often put forward much lower numbers. Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population

Since we are at or near 8 billion and are far from sustainable, haven’t been for over 50 years, I think the 1.5 number is far more realistic, maybe even high. I think the 8 billion estimates assume international cooperation, constant advances in farming tech with constantly increasing yields (that aren’t happening), and don’t account for climate change disrupting supply chains and production at various levels….so wishful thinking.

War sucks for population control. It’s messy, expensive, destructive of both infrastructure and ecology, and just crap at killing meaningful numbers. We need to reduce by billions, the worst war killed a few million and destroyed much of Europe. A war that kills 1000 times more people….yikes. Forget global warming, hello planetary disintegration.

The only acceptable method IMO is quit having children, then you don’t kill anyone to achieve sustainability. For some idiotic reason, average people find the idea of not having excess children horrific and totally out of the question, but the idea of starving their children to death seems to garner a “shit happens”.

Agreed, we need something like an airborne infectious prion where there could be no vaccine, no sterilization, no escape…..only that would wipe out everyone so maybe not that.

cloudballoon said:

Sources for the 8-10 billion & 1.5 billion figures? I'm just both fascinated & concerned about how the scientists come up with those numbers and what tech & better farming can do.

Yeah I agree the human population can't just grow & grow. But it seems the only way to do that is 1) war & 2) high cost of living has worked so far. Diseases used to be a fair equalizer as well, but with advanced R&D, even a pandemic like what we have is able to prevent mass casuality rates of the past.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Still no answer?
Again, is $2000 enough for fraudulently voting at least twice? (Honestly I think probably more like 20-40 times, since each ballot he fraudulently used had +-20 elections, that makes a vote worth $50).

If so, don’t go bitching if Soros puts a few hundred million into winning every election for the left, votes cost $50+-….$1000 per ballot, with no other penalties. That’s the democracy you want? It’s the one you guys have created.

And again, stop the terrorism against innocent civil servants….stop believing long ago debunked right wing lies….stop being the blatant troll you are. It’s not a good look.

bobknight33 said:

Good catch and he should be punished.

Lets also go after that Atlanta mother and daughter who pulled out a few suitcases of fake votes and ran them through the machines all night long giving the Biden spike... You down for that?

Gun Laws: Jon Stewart Interview w/ Former ATF David Chipman

newtboy says...

15% of all violent crime is domestic violence. It stands to reason then that 15% of killings are direct domestic violence, if not far more.
Nearly 50% of women killed in the us are killed by their intimate partner.
Guns are involved in over 50% of intimate partner homocides.
That’s guns in domestic violence cases accounting for 25% of femicides (women killed).
It’s impossible to give an accurate number for violence tangential from domestic violence (ie shot by police, collateral injuries, suicides, etc) but it’s far from zero.

https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS

https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/domestic-violence-and-firearms/

The National Gang Center under the Department of Justice based on annual surveys of local law enforcement agencies tallied 11,934 "gang-related" homicides in the U.S. from 2007 through 2012. The FBI reported 93,253 total murders during the span. Comparing the numbers, the Center estimated that "gang-related homicides typically accounted for around 13% of all homicides annually."

Researcher John Lott stated that the U.S. has a high homicide rate compared to other developed countries because of “drug gangs.”
According to the National Youth Gang Survey Analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Gang Center, and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, most gun homicides are not related to gangs.
A December 2020 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report by the CDC of 34 states, four California counties, and Washington, D.C., found that 9.7% of homicides in 2017 were gang-related

So, 25%+- of all women killed (and a similar number for men one assumes) vs 9-13% for gang violence (including tangential)…but you want to focus on “inner city gang killing” (read “black thugs”) as if it’s 90% of homocides and domestic violence death is non existent.

Again, you devolve into making up fake racist statistics to turn any issue into a racist argument. This is where you fail every single time. Fail to say what you really mean. Fail to be honest. Fail to offer true statistics. Fail as a human being….you completely racist liar.

Downvote your comment because as usual you ignore the topic, likely didn’t watch the video, and make up statistics to be a blatantly lying, unapologetic worthless piece of racist excrement.

How can you possibly be so stupid you thought no one would call you out on these easily debunked blatantly racist lies, Bob?

bobknight33 said:

OF all the killings per year how many are domestic violence?

1%
2%

OF those domestic violence what % are from guns, Knifes , other?
Evil White conservative owners are the problem? No bias here.

What about the 90+% gun violence ? inner city gang killing?
This is where you start.

Down vote since it not about any meaningful discussion of root causes.

New Rule: Words Matter | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

newtboy says...

No. We cannot.

5-10% on the left are radical and fucked in the head. >50% of the right are too. Qmorons are just one main batshit crazy portion. Edit: There’s also the anti science/anti education crowd, all on the right. And the xenophobic racist coward portion, all right wing. Then you’ve got the hyper Christians apoplectic at the idea we might help the poor, feed the starving, or treat others as they expect to be treated. Talk about delusional.

25% of the left are under educated gullible people who just accept what they see on the news without questioning it, 80% of the right are under educated gullible people who accept what they are told by foreign run propaganda channels that put “news” in their name because otherwise there would be absolutely zero news there.
The remaining 20% or less on the right are either struggling in their devil’s bargain, of selling their reputations, honesty, and sanity for temporary political or financial gains…or like my entire family, they’re walking away from lifetime Republican service that included running Bush sr’s Houston election office when he ran for governor.

The Q people….are the right. Don’t 1/2 or more of you believe that nonsense…that Democrats eat babies for eternal youth and magic power, Covid is a sham, vaccines are mind control, Jewish space lasers start wildfires because climate change is a massive worldwide hoax, school shootings are all faked, dead Democrats endorse Trump for king. Yes, wow….that’s half or more of your party…including many of your representatives. Totally certifiable nut jobs.

Wayne Brady biatch!

bobknight33 said:

@newtboy
@bcglorf


So can we generally agree that:

10% of the Left/Right are radical and way too fucked in the head.

45% of the Left / Right are just gullible people who except what they see on the news, etc.- The Q people waiting for JFK. wow

The remaining actually spend some time and thought into issues at hand.


Finally
Dave Chapel is 1 of the greatest comics of our time.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon