search results matching tag: profit

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (444)     Sift Talk (43)     Blogs (27)     Comments (1000)   

Jordan Klepper Takes On Canadian Truckers | The Daily Show

newtboy says...

I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Elon is dumping Tesla to pay some enormous capital gains and income taxes he’s avoided for the last decade by taking out loans against his stocks instead of selling any. He likes to say he’s paying the most taxes anyone ver has, and right wing propaganda is trying to back that up, but he didn’t pay any taxes for over 10 years while becoming the richest man ever…so divide by 10 and try again, liar, and his stock gains are also from his companies making artificially high profits by not paying taxes.
If reports are to be believed, he’s worth $200 billion now, so really that amounts to 5.25% total taxes (fed and state)….hardly his fair share…because he’s really a socialist welfare queen!
Be prepared for a massive slump in its value. He’s planning on selling off 10%, but prices will drop far more.

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

newtboy says...

Good until it’s not, then it’s disaster.
It’s not smart for anyone ever to put all their eggs in one basket. No matter how much they watch the basket. Shit happens, shit out of your control, and when it hits the fan, by the time you feel the spray it can be too late. Nothing is totally safe, you want to lose it all because Elon decided Dogecoin IS a good investment and puts every penny into it, then changes his mind? (Close to what happened, btw).
It’s also about diversification in successful companies so when one goes down you aren’t homeless. That is both safer and more profitable….short and long term.
All intelligent investing is about the long game, get rich quick schemes are just that, schemes, not stable investments.

If you learned from your lumps, why are you suggesting such poor investment advice? Where’s the NEXT Tesla, it already had it’s big boom. You don’t invest on the way down.


The issue is you are talking up Tesla two years too late. Pre 2020, you would have been totally correct, today not so much.

I have Apple….but not just Apple.

Precognition sounds great, but it’s always a craps game….and a crappy game.

bobknight33 said:

Not smart for some/ most, agreed. Most people let some one else manage their $. Most people don't watch day to day.

I've been buying stocks for last 20 years. Took a lot of lumps. My main goal was to not to loose my shirt. A lot of lessons learned, mainly what not to do.

Main lesson learned was to find a Amazon.Target, Starbucks or Apple just as they become trendy. If you had bought and hold any of these for the last 10 years, you would be doing just fine. Tesla fits this model. Its 20 years old and finally over last 2 really planted its stake permanently as a auto maker. They are the EV leader.

That being said Tesla is easy to follow and see. There is enough active YouTube channels people reporting daily from around the world on Tesla. A person can fully understand this business and what is going on.

Other companies are more secretive and also no one really cares.


My final thought is this. IMO Tesla is at the same point as when Steve jobs introduced the iPhone in 2006.

Dont you wish you loaded up on apple back in 2006 @ $7 bucks a share? Apple close Friday was $168.

Its about the long game.

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

newtboy says...

All in on one stock is not smart investing. Not one bit. Never. Ask anyone who invested in the highly profitable Enron stock. You might get lucky, and you might lose everything.

S&P beat Tesla by over 10% last year. If you bought Tesla last November, you already lost 1/3 of your value.

S&P also doesn’t have the highest PE ratio of all large public companies trading today at >175. (20-25 are considered good PE ratios, over 30 is overvalued, under 15 is selling at a discount)
Bubbles burst. Just saying.

Tesla’s TOTAL DOMINATION (new data)

newtboy says...

Totally agree….profitable companies shouldn’t get welfare/tax breaks. Non profitable companies shouldn’t be artificially propped up forever (unless they’re essential).

I would go farther…tax leeway at first to help them become established companies, but if they accept the tax breaks and still fail, the company assets should be forfeit to repay the taxes unpaid like any other debt. If you accept a break and succeed, pay it back over your first profitable decade with slightly higher taxes. Help up, not handouts. That’s my druthers.

Massive corporate welfare for extremely profitable companies is abhorrent to me….just like tax breaks for the ultra rich.

vil said:

So, he is pro-Elon basically.

He is an egomaniac and a fabulator.

They say in the vid the Y will not have federal tax credits, but I see your point.

There is no reason people who make huge profits should get tax exemptions. That should be a basic law.

Sure, have some leeway at first to promote location, new technology, etc. But once you turn a profit, pay taxes.

Tesla’s TOTAL DOMINATION (new data)

vil says...

So, he is pro-Elon basically.

He is an egomaniac and a fabulator.

They say in the vid the Y will not have federal tax credits, but I see your point.

There is no reason people who make huge profits should get tax exemptions. That should be a basic law.

Sure, have some leeway at first to promote location, new technology, etc. But once you turn a profit, pay taxes.

newtboy said:

Also not a good move for Elon to admit he’s far right, pro corporate subsidy, anti tax. It alienates most of his customers.

Tesla’s TOTAL DOMINATION (new data)

newtboy says...

The cars compared were as I described. There are no truly comparable electric vehicles available today. Somehow you think that’s a dig at Tesla? It’s a compliment, and a lament.

Not at all. I would love one. They have made missteps however.
Not a fan of Musk.
What should be clear is I’m not a fan of bullshit.

I’m also not a fan of monopolies.
I’m also not a fan of successful companies bargaining away their tax liabilities for little in return for the public.
I’m not really a fan of space tourism for billionaires either, not while poverty exists. What a waste of resources for no return.

Chip shortages are the only real obstacle, the rest are speed bumps.

It’s a problem if you don’t want to pay $60k for a $25k car…I thought inflation was bad. Now you love it?

Tesla made deals to not pay taxes. You can pretend that’s patriotic, it’s not. I didn’t say they ignored or committed fraud to escape taxes, I said they don’t pay them. That kind of agreement shouldn’t be acceptable for any company, especially one as profitable as Tesla. Yes, it’s a “the governor and/or legislature can waive taxes for companies he likes” policy issue, I find it abhorrent no matter which party does it, they both do.

If you backroom deal with right wing governors/legislatures to avoid taxes, you are far right, at least economically. I thought he came out as a Trump guy too, but might be wrong.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

newtboy says...

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.

👏

bobknight33 said:

I'm for this.
If homeless this kind of $ is enriching. It has real meaning.

I am against all the government strings that end up keeping one dependent of government.

Just hand out to those in need.

As for people on warfare there only need to be a set time limit of benefits. Helping is great making people dependent is wrong.

Tesla’s TOTAL DOMINATION (new data)

newtboy says...

So, time to end the subsidies and tax breaks for Tesla then. No more government handouts for them.

They’re not going to be so dominant when actual competition is available, coming soon from every maker. (High demand, low inventory, double sticker price gas cars aren’t a fair comparison.).
They also wouldn’t be so profitable if they paid taxes.

It was not a good move to program the self driving unit to run stop signs. (Yes, they programmed it to just “rolling stop” at stop signs recently which is not just illegal it’s also dangerous.). That’s the kind of upgrade you get with Tesla, without warning. How many recalls now?

Also not a good move for Elon to admit he’s far right, pro corporate subsidy, anti tax. It alienates most of his customers.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

newtboy says...

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 they’re 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.

bcglorf said:

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.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

Jonathan Pie explains Boris Johnson to the NYT

newtboy says...

Who’s committing generational warfare?
Who’s receiving it? BLM?
What!?

Do you mean generational welfare recipients?
Easy to point out that Red states take WAY more than Blue states from the fed and get less for it, and almost always take more than they put into the federal coffers too. Consistently….over generations. Your policies aren’t producing the results you insist they will. Republicans are in fact the welfare queens here, buddy. Wasting exponentially more through corporate welfare than all individual welfare recipients collectively because….FREE MARKET PRIVATE PROFITS! (But socialist public losses). D’oh!
*🦗 🦗 🦗*

bobknight33 said:

What about generational warfare recipients?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Oh no!
Good….Trump (likely) only has $93 million in liquid assets….1% of the 10 billion he’s claimed. None of his properties have shown a profit in at least two years, and they all are essentially owned by the banks that loaned him the money to buy them.
Better….he has $750 million in loan debts due in the next few years.
Best…. he also has between $100-$300 million in back taxes to pay or go to prison.

Sounds like Daddy Trump is going to be sleeping on your couch soon, he already spent all your political donations on defending his own criminal cases, and they’re all still moving forward. His lawyers are making arguments first year law students would laugh at, not actual defenses….and have bled both his and the RNCs coffers dry.
D’oh! Bad year to be a Trumpster.

The Lab Hypothesis | Real Time (HBO)

newtboy says...

The issue is the wrong guy, a dishonest blowhard trying to cover his own failures, claimed this early on with absolutely zero evidence. It was a clear dodge, his normal MO. Refusing any responsibility for ending the international pandemic response team that would have been able to actually say when and where the outbreak started, and likely be able to keep it relegated to one small area in China. By blaming it on a Chinese lab, actually saying it was intentional, he deflects from his abject failure to protect America from a clear, obvious, incontrovertibly deadly threat on the horizon….or any time after it’s discovery.
Were the Chinese studying Covid, yes, so were we. That’s not an indication of where it came from. There’s no evidence it came from any lab, only supposition at best.

Edit:Even if the guess that it came from a Chinese lab is correct, it doesn’t excuse one second of Trump’s (lack of) response and outright denials for months-years. The origin has nothing to do with the danger level, in fact, if it WERE enhanced/created in a lab as he claimed, that’s more reason to consider it MORE dangerous, not reason to claim it’s just a cold or mild flu and will disappear like magic in a few weeks. Granted, it was fun to see him (only after his trade deal fell apart) blame this deadly virus on the Chinese as an unforgivable deliberate act of germ warfare and accuse them of minimizing the danger and hiding the size and severity of the outbreak and in the same breath claim it’s nothing to worry about, not dangerous, probably not deadly, not worth any action to protect against, and just a minimal annoyance soon to disappear….but also disappointing to see how easily so many Americans glossed over the two faced hypocritical responsibility shirking stance he took.

This guy claims most, nearly all viruses can’t both infect people and be transmitted….what utter nonsense. If that were true, there would have never been epidemics, pandemics, not even outbreaks. Credibility destroyed.

I guess he didn’t hear about swine flu, or bird flu, or flu, or colds, or any transmittable virus. 🤦‍♂️
I guess they haven’t heard new mutations are far less deadly (but more transmittable) than earlier versions, so they are getting less dangerous, contrary to his claim.

Not transmitting well outdoors means it’s not natural?! Bullshit, animals nest together. Many natural viruses require close contact to transmit.

DNA testing proved early on that this is not a man made virus. Is it possible a Chinese lab made a natural virus more dangerous, then a lab mistake released it? Yes, but there’s no evidence that’s the case, even these people who’s livelihood relies on people accepting “the lab hypothesis” (hypothesis=guess) admit it’s all conjecture, there’s no evidence, certainly no proof. It’s not the lab theory because it’s unproven.

Duh.

BTW, this couple are married, anti vaxers, Ivermectin proponents, and were thrown out of Evergreen College, and are now both now discredited and disgraced. Their main source of income is now their anti vax, pro Ivermectin, Covid isn’t dangerous podcasts loved by morons like Joe Rogan, and a source of much of his misinformation that’s getting him removed from his platform.
“Bret Weinstein is one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation out there,” says Dr. David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and professor at Wayne State University who also debunks quack remedies as managing editor at a website called Science-Based Medicine. “Weinstein can be ‘credited’ with playing a large role in popularizing the belief that ivermectin is a miracle cure or preventative for COVID-19, that the vaccines are dangerous, and that the disease itself is not. Why are Rogan and Maher attracted to his messages? Contrarians and conspiracy theorists tend to be attracted to each other.”
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/09/16/bret-weinstein-and-heather-heying-go-unvaccinated-take-ivermectin/

Downvote discredited shills who profit from misinformation. No surprise at all, considering who posted this dishonest propaganda from discredited propagandists.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

LMFAHS!!
That wall that cost billions, stole private property, broke dozens of environmental laws, fell in many many places, can be thwarted easily with a ladder, rope, angle grinder, truck, or climbing skills and hasn’t slowed illegal entries one whit? That wall? Ha! You’re funny.
Remaining in Mexico (as major targets for organized crime) during the lengthy asylum application (sometimes for years)….maybe you’re too ignorant to know that never stopped.
Regaining an energy independence that never existed? Um….yeah. We had a minor surplus last year, not because of more production but because the Trump recession and the Trump pandemic lowered demand to the point where oil producers were giving oil away for free. Yes, in summer we exported some oil, but never as much as we import in winter. This is another Trump lie you repeat without a thought and certainly without verification…because you still believe what he tells you despite everything he’s ever said being a blatant lie for his entire lifetime, multiple fraud convictions, being banned from charities because he stole from veterans and children,….the list of his crimes of moral turpitude is never ending.

Goo start….nice unintentional pun. (Sad you can’t help but fail at English even as you correct your original hilarious mistake).

Increasing our oil output is a goo start, but a god awful plan. It’s actually a non starter, Biden pushed oil companies to increase production for months, but they preferred high prices and high profits. They have millions of acres with drilling rights they don’t want to use because the profit margin is 5% lower and blame the fed for not giving them access to the last pristine national forests and reserves….so again I’ll ask you, nationalize oil? If you want to blame the government, they should have control, otherwise you’re just a whining baby crying over spilled milk and blaming the wrong people.

Requiring better fuel economy from vehicles and industry, phasing in electric vehicles and more green electricity production are actually GOOD starts, and what Biden is moving towards despite total opposition from Republicans on ANYTHING. That’s how you get actual energy independence….the only way in the long term.

bobknight33 said:

Returning to Trumps policies of building the wall, Remaining in Mexico and regaining our energy independence is a goo start.



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