search results matching tag: Financial

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (454)     Sift Talk (47)     Blogs (17)     Comments (1000)   

How One Powerful Family Destroyed A Country

newtboy says...

Wow.
Sounds incredibly similar the Trump family.
Nepotism to the extreme, massive borrowing, huge financial ties to Russia and China, huge corruption and theft problems at the top, completely ignoring the plight of the quickly growing poor populace, relying on questionable at best future earnings to repay massive overspending wasted on useless wasteful projects, living lavish lifestyles as the country dwindles, printing money to pay for internal projects, causing massive inflation, refusing to leave office, ….

This could be America if Trump gets a second term. Good find, Bob.

Trump Tries To Talk- Troth Truth Senchal

bobknight33 says...

I'll take Trump over Biden any day.

America went from firing on all cylinders to being choked out financially speaking.

$6/ gal gas. Democrat policies are killing the American pocketbook.

America had a Leader, Now we have a JOKE.


Russian soldier caught with his pants down

BSR says...

"A snuff movie is a motion picture genre that depicts the actual death or murder of a person or people, without the aid of special effects, for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boKe4FSYhJM

visionep said:

Not sure why, but this video bothers me.

Maybe it's because it's likely snuff. But it's sad that people are getting killed whether it's the attackers being manipulated by their government or the people defending their homeland.

War sux.

Let's talk about Republican reaction to the SCOTUS leak....

newtboy says...

So, if Republicans are pro life, why are you so pro instruments of death? Meaning guns, specifically handguns and military anti personnel rifles both designed to kill people.
Same for the death penalty, Republicans love death.
Why do Republicans support laws that allow them to murder if they “feel threatened”?
Sure sounds pro death to me.

Seems those tools of death and destruction are the number one love of Republicans.
We’ve been over how your party is the clear winner of the debauchery award, you haven’t been able to produce a single example of democrats, which would be a no brainer if your claim were correct….and having no brain, that’s exactly what you need.

Remember, republicans said the elderly would rather be killed by their irresponsibility if it meant they didn’t have to wear masks or get a shot. Another pro death platform from Republicans.

I guess you don’t recall the Republican position, “my body my choice. Keep the government out of my body.” Or are you admitting you never meant it?

That included when choosing to not follow public health recommendations meant you might be responsible for the death of hundreds or even thousands of others. Funny how that’s good enough when avoiding the tiny inconvenience of a shot (like you’re all little crybabies deathly afraid of a short needle) but not important enough for women to avoid the “inconvenience” (by which I mean the extreme mental, physical, and financial costs) of bearing and raising unwanted children, even those of child rapists and incestuous fathers/brothers/uncles.

bobknight33 said:

Democrats : The party of Death, Destruction, Debauchery,

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Mr engineer, when there are two parties, sentence structure demands you use plurals….both sides have THEIR share of undesirables. An engineer should see grammar as a clearly defined structure that follows simple rules and just get it. Spelling is different, but grammar should be a no brainer….why is it so hard for you? Have you never seen it that way, or was engineering incredibly difficult for you too?

The difference being one side is all undesirables, and the level of undesirability. One side openly calls for an end to American democracy, death for their political rivals, death for anyone who disagrees with today’s talking point. One side has no party platform, no stated goals, and exists solely to stop any legislation the other side puts forth, even when it was something they want or that would benefit them. They are the same side.

We found another point of agreement.

Term limits are a must, and will never happen because our system does put the regulatory onus on those who need regulating….absolute insanity. It also lets them set their own salaries, ethics, and benefits.

Divestment is another must. Perhaps a bigger must. Total divestment across the board. Not just blind trusts that aren’t really blind, and absolutely not what we have now…the “honor” system run by the honorless. Allowing legislatures to write horrific laws because they can personally financially benefit is a recipe for disaster. That should (but never will) change.

Campaign finance is a third must. Corporations should have the same donation limits individuals have, which should be more like $100 each so every person can afford to have a voice, and we should return to an equal time on broadcast tv for free situation and deny the media as a political platform to give candidates a boost….no more Fox News interviews indistinguishable from campaign commercials, no more media smear campaigns, with severe penalties for violations, like $10 mil the first time, $25 mil the second, loss of fcc license the third. Another non starter….but needed badly.

PACs should be outlawed, or regulated into obscurity.

Some reasons often brought up in opposition to term limits can be traced back to Maddison who wrote "[A] few of the members of Congress will possess superior talents; will by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members of Congress, and the less the information of the bulk of the members, the more apt they be to fall into the snares that may be laid before them,"

I think we have proven at this point the cons of self serving representatives legislating for personal gains outweigh the benefits of professional legislators, especially seeing as we have the internet and huge staffs to ostensibly level the playing field of knowledge.

One fix would be the creation of an ethics branch, completely non partisan, not self regulatory, with rules against former candidates (winners and losers) and lobbyists too from serving and strict rules about how they operate, and bans from running for office or being a lobbyist afterwards so it doesn’t become a campaign platform or tool for industry. Maybe even ban close family members from the same. Won’t happen, only the best people intentionally limit their powers, and they are few and far between in Congress….all but absent on your side.

bobknight33 said:

Cheney is 1 of the "others"

Both sides have its share of undesirables.

Term limits should be a must, but we have "the fox watching the hen house" so this will never happen.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Oops, did I say hundreds of millions…my mistake, so sorry…. Recent reports of Saudi Arabia agreeing to invest a billion dollars in Trump Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin's firm despite being a horrible, very bad, no good investment according to all of the prince’s financial advisors, and new reporting from the New York Times that Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner secured a two billion dollar investment from the Saudis despite lacking the qualifications to handle such an investment and his firm being worse than Mnuchin’s by every measure and a horrific investment in terrible real estate at insanely overvalued prices….now we know why Trump took their side over Quatar, and why he (and he bragged about this) saved the royal prince from any repercussions for ordering the dismembering while alive of an American citizen and member of the press in an outrageous act of brutality and murder.

Just one more case of Trump before (read “instead of”) country.

What was that about Hunter?! Some silly baseless rumors made up in
Giuliani’s pickled brain you want investigated? Sure, right after we get the criminals we have actual verified proof on, not just baseless partisan accusations.

newtboy said:

Already proven that Trump tampered with the official call log in the whitehouse because phone calls on record to senators from the whitehouse, on their official call logs from the WH number, we’re not on the call log Trump’s team turned over (with 7 hours of calls erased).
Proven within days to be a fraud, obstruction of justice, and creating a false government record for the purposes of court.

This is you guy. This is you pick?

Yeah yeah, I know….”BUT HUNTER” you say. Sorry buddy, Hunter isn’t in the government, doesn’t work for the president, and is a private citizen, so keep going after uninvolved children of politicians, it doesn’t tarnish Joe one bit, and so far hasn’t produced anything against him, only baseless accusations that he might have used daddy’s position for personal gain, not something the Trumps want criminalized to be sure, since we have the recordings of them doing exactly that.

Unlike the Trump crime family that absolutely took in hundreds of millions in gifts and sweetheart deals from (hostile) foreign nations while working for the administration and during trade negotiations they were involved directly in….that’s normally called bribery, and it’s not a guess or fantasy, it’s public record….and they did work for the government in as nepotistic a way as possible.

Jim Carrey reacts to Will Smith Chris Rock Slap @ The Oscars

cloudballoon says...

That's hard to prove. And actually the end result would be the opposite. His recent tour's sold out. He's (rightfully) benefitting from the incident financially because he took the high road. Sue for the physical damage, sure, but whatever the amount a judge & jury would award him, it'd be just a drop in a bucket from Smith. Probably end up settled out of court. But I would most definitely take all the money from Smith. Then give it to charity to rub it in.

newtboy said:

I think Chris should sue for $500 million for damage to his international reputation and career. It has to be an amount that hurts, not a few weeks work worth of pay.

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

StukaFox says...

Bob, please read this carefully. I know we fuck around a lot here, but I 100% honestly don't want to see you get hurt financially.

Obviously, if you believe in TSLA, I understand you putting your money where your mouth is (full disclosure: I'm holding POTX and CURLF, so I'm on the same page with what I'm saying on this) but PLEASE don't bet money you don't have on TSLA.

“At 10-times revenues, to give you a 10-year payback (P/E 10, my note), I must pay you 100% of revenues for 10-straight years in dividends. That assumes I can get that by my shareholders. It also assumes I have zero cost of goods sold, which is very hard for a computer company.

That assumes zero expenses, which is hard with 39,000 employees. That assumes I pay no taxes, which is very hard. And that expects you pay no taxes on your dividends, which is kind of illegal. And that assumes with zero R&D for the next 10-years, I can maintain the current revenue run rate.

Now, having done that, would any of you like to buy my stock at $64? Do you realize how ridiculous those underlying assumptions are? You don’t need any transparency. You don’t need any footnotes.

What were you thinking?”

-- Scott McNealy was the CEO of Sun Microsystems
2002

At the peak of the Dot-Com, roughly 30 stocks in the NASDAQ 100 traded above 10 P/E. Today ALL stocks in the DAQ do: the average P/E is ~25.5.

TSLA is at a P/E of 175.

There is no American economy. There hasn't been since since October 3 of 2008. Things got catastrophically worse on September 17th of 2019 when the repo market came within hours of completely locking up in a catastrophe that would have made AIG look like a rounding error. The Fed was forced to firehose astronomical amounts of money into the system to keep this from happening and this was before Covid.

In Jan of 2021, there was $2.6 TRILLION in Zombie Debt out there. That's $2.6 TRILLION on the verge of default at 2021 interest rates. The Fed is now in a horrific position: raise rates and watch massive defaults explode like financial nukes, or keep rates steady and watch inflation implode the economy.

People don't understand how bad this is and how much worse it can get. If the Fed has to raise rates by 500 BP -- and Christ fucking help us if they do -- the first order defaults will be the worst in Capitalist history and the second and third order effects could very well be the nightmare scenario we came within 36 hours of in 2008.

Save your money, Bob. Cash is king. And fuck BTC.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

bcglorf says...

Yeah, the crutch of it for me is the UBI moniker.

What you describe at the end of your post, minimum income, is really just a rewording of the existing social security and welfare systems across the western world. I know they look different in each, but here in Canada what you describe is more or less our already existing system's design goal. Welfare money exists for those that straight up can not work, and an employment insurance system exists to protect those inbetween jobs, meanwhile other multiple programs are aimed at distributing financial assistance to the lower income groups.

Despite all of that already existing, UBI is still being heralded up here in trials as well as a replacement. The problem being that for the needy the UBI pitches are generally a step backwards.

Eg. $500/month is the UBI pitch, and they say it'll be great because everyone gets it no matter what so it's simple and fair and nobody is left behind. The trouble though is that the reality is the truly in need people were already benefitting more than the $500/month under the existing systems, and the cost was much less because it was targeted.

I here UBI and get very worried about folks just selling snake oil 'solutions' that in the end are just a demand to adopt their own particular flavor of wealth redistribution.

newtboy said:

Did they offer that in the program, or was it only random individuals….or are you extrapolating, assuming the program became universal? I thought this plan was just for the indigent.

$500 each for 4 works out to more than my wife brought home for 40 hours a week after 15 years at her last job…..barely livable for 4 anywhere in California, a nice income in some states. Not a huge amount to provide for 6 months. How much does temporary housing, services, extra law enforcement, etc cost over that time for 4 people? I assume their close.

Yes, universal income is costly, but most on the right won’t consider giving the destitute money if they don’t get a handout too, that likely multiplies the amount by over 10 times. With a means test, it would be billions, maybe under $100 billion. We spent nearly $6 trillion on bad Covid response in 2020, including trillions to corporate welfare handouts with no strings attached and they still fired millions of workers. I think if that’s ok we can afford to invest in making people productive again instead of drains on society (of course, not everyone will benefit, but 75% success must be a win overall). If not, socialize any corporation that took a bailout, we bought em, we should own them.

…Or taking on more debt like every government project, but the increase in gdp from turning costs into profits likely pays for the program without a dime in new taxes, just a reduction in costs of handling the homeless and new taxes from their incomes….especially if you have a means test and not universal income.

Yes, they convoluted by calling it universal income but focusing on homeless. It should be UMI. Universal Minimum Income….under employed get less than unemployed up to a certain minimum livable combined income, fully employed (with living wages) get nothing….IMO. Sadly, a large portion of people can’t see what’s in that plan for them (no homeless, less crime dumbshits) so won’t consider it unless they also get $500 even though that’s not even a noticeable amount to them….one more ivory backscratcher.

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.

Good Morning VIETNAM Creedence Clearwater Revival

cloudballoon says...

I think, for humanity's sake, especially since WWI, no war is really that "necessary", there are ample ways for countries to file their grivances and seek restitution. War propaganda is the age old version of "toxic masculinity" politicians & the MIC love to impressed upon easily persuaded youths & the gullibles to fight for heir own political & financial agenda.

Every tax dollar going into the military is a dollar taken away from other social services. People have to decide what's the balance. But name me the last year that the US gov't have decreased military spending and upped social services (or lower taxes)?

"Thank you for your service".... ha! Easily said than done. Just look at how much governments reaaaaaally put their moeny into VA services to help the Vets in need.

noims said:

I completely agree that both were screwed over. I happened to be talking about the vets because the phrase 'thank you for your service' seems completely hollow to me. Maybe it's a cultural thing that I can't see from the outside.

By 'prevention is better than cure' I meant not going to war in the first place, or at least treating your own side decently if war is 'necessary'.

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.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Today, speaking under oath to the senate subcommittee looking into our covid response, Dr Birx said Trump failures to support mask mandates and social distancing cost us 30-40% of the 741000 covid related deaths, so his own people blame him for almost 300000 dead Americans from just one of his many failures to protect America. When asked if Trump did everything he could to mitigate the virus and save lives, her answer was a unambiguous and unqualified “no”.

Now hide your head up your prolapsed asshole again, proclaim this verifiable fact “fake news”, and send Donny another $45 to fight election fraud, ignoring that he hasn’t spent a dime of the millions of his cultists money he’s raised claiming he was fighting election fraud on fighting election fraud, 100% of his expenditures have been administrative….paying himself, paying for his travel, paying for his extravagant lodging, often at his own properties…not one dime paying for fake audits or lawsuits, not from him or his fundraisers.

But what do you expect from a con man with multiple convictions for fraud including charity fraud, stealing money he raised for veterans.

And sweet zombie Jebus, under the inept and extremely financially conflicted Dejoy, the USPS has now completely lost our ability to send packages or first class mail to Australia! It’s been that way since early September before you try to say it’s just temporary. It’s criminal that this Trumpists crook is still in his position.

bobknight33 said:

Thank for the more fake news. I enjoy the laugh. Bull shit from the left Just to continue to smear Trump in hopes he does not run in 2024. Sad to see you fall for this. But hey Democrats need gullible people.

Democrats are so afraid that they can stop dwelling on this fake story, Especially since Biden admin is sinking faster than the Titanic.

Biden is a disaster and you know it.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Jesus Fuck! Last year Trump tried to invade Mexico and start a war on the Southern border by sending 250000 troops to the border with instructions to follow cartel smugglers back into Mexico and murder them there. Thank our lucky stars someone realized how illegal and dangerous his plan was and stopped it, or the Southern states would all be Mexico now and America would be a new world pariah.

Can’t wait for the Jan 6 report. Ex presidents don’t have executive privilege, Trump’s actions will come to light, and that will prove you support an anti American traitor who attempted a coup.

It also came to light the extent of some of his tax frauds. Just one instance, one golf course he owned was valued for taxes at $15 million. He insisted that was an outrageous inflation, it was only worth $1.5 million, and he sued repeatedly to get the taxed value lowered. At the same time, 2015 and after, he listed it as an asset when filling out financial disclosure forms to run for president, there he listed the value as well over $50 million (for credit purposes). That’s both tax and bank fraud, and just one of hundreds of felonious frauds he perpetrated for decades. Daddy Trump will likely die in prison.

Viral How Much Did Your Divorce Cost

newtboy says...

Lol.
She got out of a marriage she obviously didn't want to be in with you. I think she came out on top, no matter what it cost her financially (likely not very much).

If she had a lawyer and you didn't, but you kept more than half the marital assets, she obviously was willing to just leave with nothing just to get out, because she could have fought for more, but that would extend the marriage. That story doesn't make you the winner you think it does.

Really, it sounds like you got a house worth under $6000 and a dog, she got cash, her ride, and her freedom.

TangledThorns said:

I divorced my cheating wife without paying for a lawyer. She paid for one and I got to keep house and the dog, she got to keep her car and got $6, 000. I think she didn't want to push it as I had recording of her cheating, lol. Yeah, I think I came out on top.



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