search results matching tag: From Below

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (736)     Sift Talk (222)     Blogs (89)     Comments (1000)   

JiggaJonson (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Ouch. From $1222 to $702 and projected below $600. Gotta sting for anyone who took @bobknight33 ‘s advice, especially anyone “all in”.

The idea that it might bounce back like it once rose is naïve too…with serious production and labor issues and no longer being the only game in town, not even the best anymore by multiple different measurements, Tesla is looking like it’s bubble might be bursting.

Ouch.

JiggaJonson said:

https://www.investopedia.com/tesla-removed-from-widely-tracked-esg-index-5295510

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/why-tesla-stock-fell-again-today

And i saw their price target went from $1,200 to $1,000 now it's down to $600 as a target.


Good luck with where the price is at.

WHOOPS!
I didn't mean to end a sentence with a preposition. I will correct.

Good luck with where the price is at, asshole.

When Democrats have all branches in their states

newtboy says...

So, Bobby, what is the 2020 Republican platform?
“Block Democrats from any progress”, absolutely nothing else.
There wa a proposal for a Republican Party platform….”1) raise taxes by $4500 on all low income people who today don’t pay taxes because they are below the poverty level and 2) end all social programs like Medicare, Medicare, social security, food assistance programs, etc. by “sun setting” any social program every 5 years and requiring the new legislature to start over from scratch (unless the right has control, then forget it).

“We cannot blame republicans (for rich people not paying taxes) when HOUSE democrats have the majority” 1) the tax breaks for the rich were enacted when Republicans held the house, senate, presidency, and a supermajority in the Supreme Court…a simple majority in the house and no where else after the fact does not give Democrats the ability to repeal a horrific law.

Then he wants to blame the California legislature for local groups fighting against low income housing in their neighborhood, for zoning and construction laws that severely limit where and how you can build. Such nonsense. The housing crisis in California is not limited to the homeless, there just aren’t enough houses to buy or rent. Pretending there are just no programs to secure housing, that the legislatures just don’t care and are ignoring the issue isn’t just ignorant, it’s outright dishonest. No surprise at all considering the source. California has a housing crisis, not simply an “ignoring the homeless “ problem. Property in California is so in demand that average workers are priced out of the market and fully employed people find themselves homeless. Red states have cheap property because successful professional people don’t want to live there, which leads to more affordable housing and fewer homeless. My property has quadrupled in value over 20 years, and I’m not in any town or city.

California just approved $12 BILLION to spend on our homeless issues. Red states pass laws essentially making homelessness a crime, so many homeless migrate to “blue states” where services exist and they aren’t put in jail for sleeping in public or loitering.

Texas just made it illegal for homeless people to camp in tents.

So, Bob, tell me about the Republican plans to house the homeless in red states. About all the services and assistance they want to provide but are blocked by democrats from moving forward. Show me the high end Republican neighborhoods inviting low income housing into their neighborhoods, keeping in mind that many, even in California, are right wing neighborhoods with Republican led local government that blocks construction.

You’ve tried this nonsense propaganda before, about 6 months ago when it was originally posted if I recall, I debunked it thoroughly then. So sad @bobknight33 can’t remember anything for over 3 seconds or he would recall the last time he posted this nonsense opinion piece and I rubbed his nose in it.

Downvote into oblivion this right wing projection,

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

newtboy says...

Using people as a wedge is upsetting. I wish the right would stop, but their platform is based on mutual hatred of the “other”, so ostracism is a main tool for them.
Trying to secure the rights of Americans to compete in publicly funded sports is not creating a wedge, it’s being a civic American where tolerance and inclusion of those different from you is a cornerstone of our national identity.

No, that’s not common sense. It’s a red herring you would use to deny non binary people the right to participate. As I showed, divisions based on biological “sex” lead to men (biological women) like the boxer above fighting against girls. Is that more “fair”? Hardly.

Yes, trans people follow those rules, and must be hormone supplement free for years before being allowed to compete in most arenas. Non trans people have access to the same supplements, and also need to stop them before they can compete professionally. People naturally have different levels of hormones, we don’t force them to suppress or enhance them to compete, nor do we exclude those with medical needs for supplemented hormones…unless they’re trans. Red herring.

What genitalia you have has no bearing on your performance in sports, unless there are competitive orgies I’m unaware of.

One or two trans athletes being outstanding proves the point that there isn’t a noticeable advantage….otherwise every sport would be dominated by trans athletes….and that’s simply not the case. I bet statistical analysis would show trans athletes are not better, but worse on average than their non altered counterparts for many reasons.

Funny how denying a group their rights to participate (or exist?) in your eyes is “equality” and equitable.

Edit: How do you feel about hormone testing to decide which group you compete in? Too much testosterone, or not enough estrogen, compete with the “Ts”,…below the line on testosterone, or above the line on estrogen, compete with the “Es”. Or how about just separate by body mass index? Now is the problem solved? Do you concede that now the debate is settled? LMFAHS!!

In your biased, ignorant little mind it’s settled, not the real world where facts override your ignorant feelings and misconceptions and people’s rights to participate in publicly sponsored competition aren’t over ridden by ignorance and thinly veiled hatred.

🤦‍♂️

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

1. Given how few people are affected, I'd love to see way less coverage of trans-sports as a wedge issue to rally political bases

2. Failing that, isn't it clearly 100% common sense that the Men's and Women's sports divisions are NOT divisions applied based upon gender but instead upon biological sex, and as such should always have been a non-issue.

3. I really can't see the issue, if it must be raised, as anything other than a request for special exemptions to be made. Existing competitive sports are divided based on biological sex and most have requirements around usage of drugs, hormones and other performance enhancing substances. We have existing and established testing for both the biological sex and PED requirements. Applying those equally to everyone IS equality.

/s There, now the debates all settled /s

Absolutely insane crowd jams Raleigh street for home showing

newtboy says...

I think that house is listed almost $100000 below market value based on other home prices in Raleigh. Of course hundreds of people want it.
My neighbor just sold their tear down mobile home, listed for $250k, sold for $300k after 4 days. If you list your home with a low asking price, you will get offers, lots of offers. It’s nothing new.

Buy land, they aren’t making it anymore.

We WILL Fix Climate Change!

newtboy says...

What’s he mean “young people”? I’m 50, I’ve felt that way since 1990 because I pay attention. We are addicts, addicts use until they die, they don’t quit because their health suffers.

At 3 degrees some developing countries won’t be able to feed their population!?! WTF?! That was the case before any climate changes, dummy. It’s bad now. It will be apocalyptic relatively soon…like decades, not centuries.

WILL cause trillions in damage!?….guess again, already happened. It WILL cause tens of trillions in damage per year, eventually outpacing global gdp.

What scientists are he counting when he says “most agree” we won’t see this kind of future? Certainly not climate scientists, they agree it’s happening, and none see it even slowing, much less getting better. From what I saw, they just went on strike because they’re sick of being ignored.

Leveled off, eh? Look at your own graph to see that China’s coal consumption went up by 5000 twh equivalents since 2010, and is insanely massive…it went up by more than the US used at its highest levels (in his timeline). But he calls that “leveled off”. Who is this guy? He’s insane or lying through his teeth.

Solar and wind have been better than coal economically for decades, but we haven’t switched over, have we?

Where does he get his statistics, because every time I see real numbers we’ve only slowed our increased emissions by 4%, we have not actually reduced them….like saying Obama reduced the military budget because he didn’t increase it as much as previous administrations. It’s asinine.

India isn’t building trillions in solar, they’re building fossil fuel power plants and hydro electric, also disastrous for the environment….and useless after their glaciers fail.

The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for 300-1000 years, carbon capture is a ridiculous pipe dream that completely ignores the scope of the problem. Methalhydrate is already destabilized, and it’s 25 times as potent as CO2. The total global amount of methane carbon bound up in these hydrate deposits is in the order of 1000 to 5000 gigatonnes – i.e. about 100 to 500 times more carbon than is released annually into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas). It’s melting now faster every day, and will surpass human carbon emissions.

None of his “requirements” are happening. What we need is less people….like 90% less.

Progress is being made, minor progress in small amounts on tiny scales…so are increases in emissions but on massive scales and unfathomable amounts….emissions that needed to be at zero decades ago to save civilization as we know it. Climate refugees exist today in huge numbers, think how difficult 1 million Syrians were for Europe to absorb, now multiply by 2000 or more when all equatorial nations become uninhabitable. Where will we grow food with refugees covering every bit of land? Get real.

He admits that stopping warming below 1.5 degrees is impossible, and 3 degrees before 2021 likely (many say by 2050). Did he forget that 1.5 degrees warming is where we lose control and feedback loops make our emissions moot?

Do you even science, dude?

He gave me zero hope, because I know most of his pie in the sky “hope” is utterly ridiculous and runs contrary to reality and human nature. I wanted some good news, I got pablum.
Booo Kurzgesagt. Try being honest and not ignoring the facts, please. BOOOOO!

Demi Moore Does One Armed Push-Ups!

newtboy says...

I also had no idea about her alopecia, and don’t care. She has the resources to buy wigs indistinguishable from her real hair if it mattered, but I don’t see why it should. She looks fine bald, why get upset over nothing?!

I had hair below my ass in my 20’s, then cut it to 1/4 inch long one day when my hairline started retreating, now I shave it. I’m lucky my head looks ok bald, because I have little choice these days.

Nothing wrong with being weird, lots wrong with being normal or average. Let your freak flag fly!

cloudballoon said:

I though so too. Watching the red carpet segment just before the Oscars, both my wife & I were talking about how great Jada looks bald (we don't pay attention to celebrity news, and we had no idea she got Alopecia before the slapping scandal).

I went bald once (accidentally) and due to the shape of my head, bald just doesn't look good on me, so I kind of envious of people like Jada, the Rock, etc. I'm weird I know.

Eta Carinae: 3D Model of the Most Dangerous Star Known

Pence Finally Tells The Truth

noseeem says...

Can only guess what BK33's video is about. Seeing "T*****'s lawer" and the "Q" in the corner, is like being offered a cold sore lipped kiss.

I'll pass.

If it was something about '16 vs '20 - it's a poor point. No one died. People were unhappy but compliant. No one lied that the votes were tainted. '16 was far more sane and civil.

AND LOOK WHO WAS INSTALLED IN 2016!

It was like a Prom fiasco where the frogs from the biology lab won both King and Queen. Just made a mockery of the Prom's First Dance.

All the more reason the objection(s) to the 2020 election was a travesty. 2016 installed one of the worst ever!

https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall

[Even ranked below a man that really never served. Man on his deathbed was considered a better President.]

JiggaJonson (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

To be fair, I brought up IQ when Bob accused me of being “stupid as shit” before going on to mangle his next sentence.

The only thing I think IQ measures is problem solving ability. It is not a good indicator for future success, happiness, knowledge, experience, morality, or opportunities. Far from an end all measure, but it can be a decent measure of expected limitations in certain arenas. It would not surprise me to find out that the school I went to in Texas had fairly high minimum IQ score requirements. The classes were all accelerated and well above grade level, and I’m sure they wouldn’t accept a below average intelligence student and doom them to failure.
And yes, I understand there are numerous examples of IQ and biased testing being used to separate, subjugate, and denigrate groups of people….my school may have used them to deny many non white applicants….it was a prep school in Texas.

JiggaJonson said:

You know, the IQ test doesn't really measure anything useful, has crazy limitations, and often produces inaccurate and wildly variable results, right?

There is one thing people in the early 20th century used it for tho, it's not surprising that you, sir, are fond of it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#IQ_testing_and_the_eugenics_movement_in_the_United_States

Pipe Lining - the step-by-step process - Part II

vil says...

This video is for show, normally they would line the tube in place.

Also most useful if the pipe is inside a wall between two expensive apartments or below something you cant dig under. Its for special cases.

Rain pipe and chimney proctologist. We have a camera on a cable.

mxxcon said:

So much work and hassle...

You work as a proctologist?

Rebuilding the Oroville Dam Spillway | Practical Engineering

luxintenebris jokingly says...

pretty easy to call joe out on his dealings when even the w.v. coal miners are asking him to change his mind.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-20/coal-miners-urge-manchin-to-rethink-opposition-to-spending-bill

just checked some data from government sources and such. looks like america is losing it's population. literally. birth rates are below replacement rates. in fact, projections have the world population slowing to the point that by the end of the century, the vast majority of all the countries citizens on the plant will be on the decline.

abortion?! we're killing off the very IDEA of kids!!!

selfishness, disguised in rhetoric as 'self-determination', is in reality - self-termination.

so why not 'waste' the money on us now? at least, what kids will make it to the future, will have nice roads (at least until the Neo-GOP stalls any Infrastructure for the 22nd century).

what the hell? feed the inner republican: spend the money on me, me, and me.

happy xmas, merry new year everyone!

(should comment on actual video: DAM!)

newtboy said:

edited for brevity.

what he said.

Amazing Lego-Style HEMP BLOCKS Make Building a House Quick

JiggaJonson says...

Since it's organic material, what's the longevity of something like this? Susceptibility to mold and corrosion?

What's meant by "below grade"?

And finally, it's sad that they had to PR machine their product name because

"hurrr hurrr hurr dijuuu get hiigh if your house catches on fire man?"
"So...you're not interested in investing or...?"

PFAS: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

newtboy says...

The EPA just today announced plans to set actual enforceable limits for drinking water contamination by the two most common variants, hopefully well below the 70/1000000 unenforceable recomendation they previously issued, before the 2023 deadline, and to study the health effects of other variants and regulate them.
They also announced plans to force polluters to clean up the places where they dumped, which seems to be impossible considering the size and mobility of these molecules, and the fact that they've already migrated everywhere so can't possibly be fully removed.

PFAS: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

newtboy says...

Nonsense. Pre industrial agriculture wasn’t very damaging in most cases…and when it was it was on a minuscule scale compared to industrial agriculture.
Pre industrial building wasn’t excessively environmentally damaging in most cases, certainly not to the point where it endangered the planet or it’s atmosphere.

It's utterly ridiculous hyperbole to say we have to be cavemen to not destroy our environment. We don't even have to revert to pre industrial methods, we just have to be responsible with our actions and lower the population massively. With minor exceptions, pre industrial farming caused little to no permanent damage, and it was almost all easily repairable damage. (With a few exceptions like Rapa Nui that may not have been over farming but cultural damage, we aren't exactly certain what happened there).

I eat berries now, don't you? I grow raspberries, blackberries, black raspberries, blueberries, strawberries, and Tay berries myself. People would be healthier if they ate berries, and they're tasty too. What?!

Yes, around 7 billion need to die (without procreating first). Better than all 9 billion.

There’s a huge difference between being occasionally deadly and so insanely toxic we destroy our own planet in under 200 years to the point where our own existence is seriously threatened.
Edit: toxicity levels matter as much as exposure levels. Cavemen impacted their environment at levels well below sustainability (mostly….the idea they killed the mammoths or mastodons off by hunting is, I believe, a myth….natural environmental changes seem much more likely to be the major influence in their extinction.). Per capita, modern humans have a much larger, more detrimental footprint than premodern humans, exponentially larger….and there’s like a hundred thousand times as many of us (or more) too. We need to reverse both those trends drastically if we are to survive long term.

Yes, progress includes risk, but risk can be managed, minimized, and not taken when it’s a risk of total destruction. We totally ignore risk if there’s profit involved.

This is a night time comedy show, not a science class. I think you expect WAY too much. It points out that there is a problem, it doesn’t have the time, or the audience to delve into the intricate chemical processes involved in the manufacture, use, and disposal of them. It touched on them, and more importantly pointed out how they’ve been flushed into the environment Willy nilly by almost everyone who manufacturers with them.

vil said:

By that logic, Newt, its back to caves and eating berries for everyone. And 7 billion people need to die to make planet Earth sustainable.

Everything civilization does is toxic in some way. Even living in caves was deadly, ask the Mammoths.

I like how youre taking everything responsibly but in this case you might be lumping too many things into one problem. If we strive for any progress at all we have to take risks.

Maybe the consensus will be that we cant handle the production problems and need to ban the poly stuff, but this video was not the compelling analysis that would even push me in that direction.

Joe Machin and the Deficit

newtboy says...

You mean like Trump's last year in office when he spent well over the conservative estimates of $6.55 Trillion and collected only $3.4 Trillion in total income?
($1.6 trillion of which came from personal income taxes, $212 billion from corporate taxes...sure, that seems fair and proper)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/216928/us-government-revenues-by-category/

So essentially a tax Holliday year with the money going back to all citizens? What a major improvement that would be....and with the economy coming back after the Trump recession/depression, Biden doesn't have to put everything on credit, he can pay for his spending, and maybe pay for some of Trump's massive debts he left.

Trump came in with under $19.5 Trillion and left with over $28.5 Trillion in debt and his last year yielded a $5.2 Trillion deficit and the worst unemployment and biggest GDP drop EVER!!! Obama shrank the deficit to below $500 BILLION! Clinton had a surplus!!! Bush turned that into a deficit within one year and a near $1.5 Trillion deficit and depression when he left.

BTW, it should be a comma after "matter", not a period and double spacing. It's only one complete sentence. Even just 8th grade English class would have taught you that....also "let's" has an apostrophe, it means "let us"....are you sure you really graduated middle school? I can't see someone passing third grade with these English skills.

bobknight33 said:

Hell if it does not matter.

Lets add yet another 4 , 6 or 8 Trillion on top of this and send out Biden checks to all Americans.



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