Trump promised worm brained RFK “control of the HHS, CDC, FDA, NIH, USDA, and also a few others”.
USDA…the guy who got brain worms and multiple other parasites from eating road kill in charge of food safety?
NIH…Who doesn’t believe in science? Who says all vaccinations are worse than the diseases they prevent?
FDA…does he believe in pharmaceutical medicine?
CDC….so the next pandemic will be guaranteed and worse with the leader suggesting take your chances, get the disease intentionally, there will be no vaccine.
I thought he would just be running the NIH….disastrous enough, but holy shit.
Remember what he said about RFK jr just a few months ago? Now he wants him in charge of 1/3 of government!?

Meanwhile, Elon has admitted what every single economist has said, that he and the felon’s economic plans will almost certainly destroy the economy in short order leading to a depression next year but don’t worry when the market crashes and you lose your job, 401k, home, social security, and Medicare…they will rebuild in MAGA’s image…just like Russia did when it gave all its wealth to oligarchs and now has 50% poverty rates.

100% correct.
You ended up with less because of why?
What happened?
Did Trump take your job or did Democrats shut down you employer? Or other?

Trump isn't tanking the economy. What is Biden doing to curb inflation?

Under Trump I was getting min 20% /year growth in 401K/IRA.
Now I get dick. Make America Great Again, Yea, he was.

How much more $ do you have to spend compared to under Trump?

Inflation at 9% How is that helping. Make Americans poor again?

Oh no!
Remember how the stock market was supposed to tank under Biden, 401k's would be worthless, forget ever retiring? Turns out it's had the best first hundred days of an administration in 75 years under Biden. D'oh!

I lost money during the Trump administration, about 8-10% overall across my portfolio....since Biden was elected I've made it all back and another 15%+. How about you?

You utter fuckwit.

(not you, Morhaus, the dude in the video).

What exactly do you think happens to the people and funds holding those shorts? They have to pay the difference. They are contractually obligated to pay up -- period.

Everyone involved in the short was probably broke long before GME even hit $50. But, as we all learned from Goodfellas, "Fuck you, pay me!"

They're broke and on the hook for shit-tons of money. Guess where they're going to get that money? By selling solid assets. They're gonna dump everything they have to make up for the short loss. Who's holding the shares that're about to start tanking? The funds 401ks are invested in because they have to hold solid, reliable assets. The same funds people are relying on for their futures. These are the people who'll REALLY get fucked by this. If you've got a long enough timeline, hopefully, you'll get your money back (although at a loss of compounded value). If you're 65 and looking at your golden years through a lens of 20%+ returns, you're about to find out what happens when an irrational market decides to return to sanity.

Those are the first order effects. The second order effects range from the merely worrying to the outright fucking terrifying. There's a reason Goldman sent out its little missive last night after Mark Cuban pulled his stunt. This isn't just playing with fire, this is sitting in a room full of gasoline while Skippy, The Face-Ripper Ape On Meth, goes berserk with a blowtorch. God help us if this triggers some latent long-tail event.

The good news is that the idiocy of the crowds has apparently decided to dump GME in favor of silver. GME tanking will be bad, but mostly to people who should pay the price for dabbling magic they didn't understand. GME dumping will be good if you're worried about 2008 repeating itself, only without the whole "not letting AIG" fail thing.

People do not understand how fragile and insanely-interconnected the markets are, and how easily the whole goddamn thing could be brought down. We never solved the problems of 2008, we just dumped money on them; we never solved the underlying issues that lead to the Temper Tantrum of December 2018; and we sure the fuck didn't fix the fundamental issue that almost brought the whole show down on September 17 of 2019. And all this was before Covid. There's a reason I went all-in on bonds back in August and that Warren Buffet is sitting on a mountain of cash, and this is pretty much it.

So yeah, congrats to the little guy and all that shit, but don't think for a second that people at the top are going to be the ones who pay.

"..Salary is the amount they give you to forget your dreams.

401K is my way to walk away from my boss and get back the dream..." BobKnight33

Be careful with truth. If you wake up too many they will resent you.

@StukaFox
@newtboy
@BSR
@vil
@eric3579
@wtfcaniuse



I love you all, even newtboy.

I enjoy this site because it bubbles up quality ( mostly) vids.

Political views are 180 from this site. Netboy is 100% incapable to rational thought of seeing the other side or even considering it. Hence I put a equally firm line in the sand. Newtboy is brilliant in his discussion but intolerant. I would think we all came across this at some point.


Do I think Trump is a A hole, Yep at times. But you also have to admit the boy has done some really big things last 4 years.
Moving our Consulate to Jerusalem.
( Last 4+ POTUS have promised but he did it)
Got 5 Muslim nations to engage in normalize relations with Israel.
( This is a big deal)
Plus great growth in America, and much more.
All with zero respect from media.

Trump fighting the Election results: That's his right. Does he have a chance. Slim. But the boy always willing to go to the distance. He's a fighter. He might pull it off, Hope he does.


Not looking for anything different to what everyone else is.
Decent pay, better life for my children.


I want all to succeed. I've posted TESLA video to show you that hopefully you will look into them and invest in them.

This is the decade of EV ( electronic vehicles). Get in on it.

I want you all be financially secure.


Salary is the amount they give you to forget your dreams.

401K is my way to walk away from my boss and get back the dream.

Roll over your Co 401k to a self directed and jump in. This gives you complete control. Its your life, control it. Nobody cares more about your money than you.

Time off with out pay- ok.
Why should a company be obligated to pay you for sick time?
Its nice when they do.

1 of the first things you learn as an adult is to set aside 6 months pay and put $ in you 401k.

These are you fund for such times.

I never paid much attention to my employer's 401k administrative fees until they recently changed 401k providers. I was blown away that our new CFO with the company for the last year, not only fought to introduce Vanguard funds as investment choices, which offered significant cost savings, changed our 401k provider. When I looked into the paperwork to try to figure out why, it became abundantly clear - he saved 1% in annual administrative fees on the plan.

Kudos to him! I sent him an email immediately thanking him for doing an awesome thankless job hardly anyone will likely appreciate.

Do I sell the wife and kids or take from the 401K to get one.

Kawasaki H2 & H2r Full Review :

http://videosift.com/video/Kawasaki-H2-H2r-Full-Review

Well, he's the boss of that piece of sugar cane that he's putting through the ringer. Won't have to worry about 401k's or maternity leave for it though.

I haven't watched the video, but I'm guessing 401ks?

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

>> ^AeroMechanical:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
I'm starting to not get new pop culture references. Does this mean I'm getting old?
http://pinterest.com/

Oh, no. Of course not. It means you are an adult. That usually takes until at least 30 these days at a minimum.
edit: Almost as soon as I wrote that, I realized the logical fallacy. Truth be told, in all likelihood, the 25-year-olds I know today who still play Pokemon and watch Naruto will never really become adults. I suppose maybe that isn't a bad thing though.
So being an adult means you can't like fun stuff any more? Fuck that!


That's about the size of it. Instead, you have to get all excited about mortgage rates and how much your job matches you on your 401K. Then you have kids, which people say is a lot of fun, but looks more like stress and a lot of work to me.

The other day, a friend of mine said he didn't need to smoke ganja any more because when his baby daughter smiles, it's better than any drug. I just about puked.

Did you not read what I wrote? I'm pretty sure I said the national debt is a problem. My issue with you is your rationale for the national debt is overly simplistic and utterly ridiculous. OH NOEZ! The average taxpayer owes 137K if the national debt is broken down per taxpayer, and the overwhelming majority of Americans don't have 137K lying around to pay that. Say, do most Americans have 50K laying around? No. So if the debt were cut in third roughly, surely it wouldn't be a problem. See? The rationale doesn't hold up. Most Americans don't have 10K laying around either, but if that were the debt per taxpayer, the national debt wouldn't be a problem. Not to mention the fact that wealth is concentrated in this country, too. Granted, most people don't have 137K laying around, but you know who has millions upon millions laying around? Guys like Warren Buffett, Mitt Romney, etc. etc. The stat you threw out doesn't mean a damn thing. It just sounds bad.

That's the kind of crap that makes discussing something like this with you utterly impossible. You don't care if the national debt is truly a problem. You WANT it to be a big problem that must be dealt with immediately, and THE ONLY WAY to deal with it is... survey says... reduce spending. NO TAX INCREASES!!! EVER!!!

It's a pointless discussion. You've already made up your mind the national debt is a problem that must be dealt with like a crisis, with only one way to deal with it. Any rational person would look at this issue and conclude that even if it is huge problem, (which by the way, since you can't apparently read, I DO think it's a problem, but does not need to be dealt with in extreme measures, or unilaterally with spending cuts only) cutting spending isn't the only solution. I also know that we've run up historical deficits in our past and came out the other end a stronger nation. I also know that the vast majority of the current deficit has been caused by the Iraqi and Afghan wars, by the Bush tax cuts (which actually caused more debt than those wars did, and a collapsing economy.

Comparison between POLICIES of Bush vs Obama as contributors to the national debt:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24editorial_graph2/24editorial_graph2-popup.gif

Sorry, but that's the truth. The reality is we spent ourselves out in two wars and cutting taxes to ridiculous proportions.

As a side note, I just did my taxes. I'm married with no kids, my wife doesn't work due to medical reasons. I make $122,000/yr in a lower than average cost of living area. You know what my effective federal tax rate was? 10%! How in the hell can the federal gov't do what it needs to do when I'm paying 10% effective federal tax rate?! It's absurd. And it's not like I was hell bound to escape paying taxes. My deductions? $5000 in wife's traditional IRA contribution, state income taxes, mortgage interest, and some charitable donations. I benefited also from 401k contributions and a Flexible Spending Account program.

Unless you're willing to go on record and say GDP cannot be raised significantly from where it is today in the next 5 years, which would increase tax revenues to make up for much of the deficits we're running today, you don't have a leg to stand on. I'm not in favor of cutting any gov't spending that would jeopardize significantly economic growth in the short run. Therefore, I don't think we can cut a whole lot of spending right now, and we'll unfortunately have to run very large deficits in the short run. However, once the economy grows significantly, we will need to cut spending at that point, and run substantial surpluses for awhile to get the debt more manageable again.

That is what we've done in the past, and it worked when facing very severe economic downturns. Call me crazy, but I look at history and see what worked, and follow that path.

>> ^bobknight33:

From you example of going into debt for war sake is a nice comparison. In today's terms we spent 1 trillion on the Bush war and and a fair amount on Obama continuation of the wars. If we were only in 1 - 2 trillion of debt that's one thing but we are hitting 16 Trillion dollars of debt. That is a whole different kind of debt.
Like I said earlier our government has currently cause each of us to incur a bill of 50K per man woman and child or 137K per taxpayer. Who of us can pay that debt back? Not Me and surly not you.

You basically don't see this as a problem so I ask you when does it become a problem?

@NetRunner It would be over simplistic for me to say what "the real problem" is, I was pointing out "a" problem I see with certain mindsets. But surely, the people you mention do exist, and to that I mean people who want a certain degree of leeway in those they help. A person who spends a good deal of his time taking care of his body may find it slightly repulsive to pay for the care of someone whom has not taken care of himself, and perhaps rightly so. The shoe exists on the other foot as well, I am not blind to those who very little personal action was taken but very much social/economic/political benefit was reaped. Often have I toyed around with different ways of managing property rights and such to eliminate or make more difficult the position of the freeloading, powerful man.

I don't deny the need of government, nor would I suggest its eradication. My objection was more in line with "how" people are solving the problem of a non-functional government. Forgive me, but having been to several protests now, I find them moronic. It plays out like children jumping on a bed in a stew of anger. Some of Cobert's recent shows on OWS, and before it, the Tea Party stuff made me laugh to tears as I so greatly identified with is complaints. The overall event of a rally is a dogmatic, simplistic, and mostly naive portrayal of the problems, and to rant about even more dogmatic, arbitrary and simplistic solutions. To be forthright, I am an introvert. Large groups of people will, in time, always annoy me, and as such, I admit that perhaps there is something different about a rally that I don't understand. Some kind of comradery in spouting babbling cheers, sitting a public place for no real objective, and making a ruckus. It would seem that most of a rally is about being seen, and I would rather not be. Instead, I would rather be unseen, but actually affecting. It seems more beneficial as a rally only can indirectly change something, where as any other course of direct action has a real effect. For instance, if I were mad about jobs, the last thing I would do is OWS, I would instead seek to create a job fair.

And that was my main point, rallying seems to be the battle cry for those whom want solutions to be created by someone else. Why waste your time and money supporting a rally instead of the cause itself? I used to not have this world view. But, I hold now that spending your energies directly addressing the problem is more beneficial, in large, than trying to bring "awareness" to it. Perhaps I am wrong, though, and some level of awareness is needed just to enact the more hidden, direct changes, hard to say.

The reason I mentioned any of this was because of the position Mr. Moore took up on Obama. He talked about how it was young people that got him elected, that he didn't do the job he was elected to do exactly the way he laid it out, so they became disenfranchised. That was my main concern, and it would seem that those who fall victim to this are the same that think rallying will do anything other than have a rally. As a libertarian minded person, the last thing I am looking to do is give people less of a voice, my aim is almost always entirely the opposite. My objection was that outsourcing your voice to something that is only going to indirectly help you might not be the best course of action. Mad about wall street, fine, but do you still have a 401k? Often times, we are, esoterically, part of the problem and it is that kind of conversation you won't find at a rally. We are always in the right, and we were always wronged by some evil third party...a great children's story, but more often than not, not exactly true.

Sorry for the long rant. More poor command of the egrish usually means I babble on.

You trolling much?
She is asking for the government to tax her. You are missing the entire point if you think she should be ashamed of making millions - that would be class warfare. What she is requesting is that the tax code be adjusted and the tax breaks for the rich that Bush instituted be repealed. She is OK with paying more taxes. On the other hands, the same people that lobbied for deregulation are still fist-fucking the general public (yes, your 401k if you have a job, and your property value if you have a house) while asking school teachers to take salary cuts, because we all know that this economy collapsed because of those greedy school teachers and their worthless jobs.

>> ^conan:

oh boohoo Rachel, those bad rich folks. What did you say when they offered you millions for your show?