- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
Master Thread Dance Your Cares Away/Fraggle/Law Abiding Citizens
- Thread starter Bryan74b
- Start date
Master Threads
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
Him & Trump = Troll Kings
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
LMAO
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2021
- Messages
- 10,776
It's winter now over there. Will we see more examples of men being striped naked and saran wrapped to frozen metal light poles? That's something which should be done to scumbags here.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 3,107
I am not sure what to think of Musk but I do know i love what twitter has become since he got there. Much addition by subtraction. If he continues to push for the place to be a true free speech place, where people of all beliefs can express them without being shut down, I may actually join it. Gonna wait on that though because I have a healthy distrust of social media.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
How we lost the Mid-Terms -
Yes Americans are this Fucking Stupid
I might pay 1% of that to grudge-fuck that liberal bitch in the ass...
And I'd still be over-paying!
Yes Americans are this Fucking Stupid
I might pay 1% of that to grudge-fuck that liberal bitch in the ass...
And I'd still be over-paying!
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
Here's how you celebrate a "W"
Watch until the "cheers" at the end!
Watch until the "cheers" at the end!
Belezabro
Elite
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2021
- Messages
- 989
Same here. I had an account but deleted when the Trump, Floyd, riots, etc. BS started happening.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
Who volunteered for the first test flight on this one?
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2021
- Messages
- 3,483
And will still lose AZ, MI, GA, PA, NV
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
- Messages
- 3,029
I was first fagit
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 3,107
Never liked her, even before I realized she is a liberal. I also find that her being who she is in that regard, it makes her not attractive to me. Would never have anything to do with a liberal on a personal level. I enjoy smart people more.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 27,247
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2021
- Messages
- 10,776
It should be single subject bills but that would force them to be in DC and not jetting around the world collecting offshore bank account donations.
However, until it is passed, the GOP should attach a mandated O&G production everywhere with an immune to restriction by any agency or government official clause to any bill wanting to give more money to Ukraine or any other bill the OBiden admin wants. They should do the same to the border too.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2020
- Messages
- 778
I'm pretty sure this is false. Fagits have been around for centuries.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
- Messages
- 3,029
I'm pretty sure this is false. Fagits have been around for centuries.
AgEngDawg
Legendary
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 9,799
Best Article you Could Possibly Read About What is Going on at Titter:
compactmag.com
The Email Caste's Last Stand
Most discussions of Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter have focused on its political implications. In many accounts, Musk is engaged in a war against “the cathedral”—that is, against the dominance of professionals who have sought to make the internet more restrictive. Musk has now supposedly poked...
Most discussions of Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter have focused on its political implications. In many accounts, Musk is engaged in a war against “the cathedral”—that is, against the dominance of professionals who have sought to make the internet more restrictive. Musk has now supposedly poked the first hole in the digital Berlin Wall erected over the past half decade.
Yet there is another aspect of the Musk takeover that has little to do with free speech or even ideology—although it has a great deal to do with the class interests of Big Tech censors. As a recession looms, Silicon Valley is shedding the non-essential workers it acquired when unlimited venture funding made turning a profit an afterthought. Musk happens to have taken the helm at Twitter just as this reality is asserting itself. In this sense, the revolt against his leadership is the last stand of a cohort of activist hangers-on who are about to find themselves unemployed.
Musk paid $44 billion to acquire Twitter, and all indications are that the platform isn’t worth anything close to that. Once he got access to the company’s finances, the Tesla boss realized it was losing millions of dollars every day, and that many of its employees weren’t doing much work at all. So he proceeded to do what most executives would do in this situation: He laid off some of his workers.
“Tech companies ran off the cliff long ago.”
The abrupt firing of thousands of employees solicited a new wave of outrage from Musk’s haters. But even if you remove him from the equation, Twitter couldn’t have gone much longer without massive layoffs. The same thing is happening across Silicon Valley. Last week, the online-payments company Stripe announced it would cut 14 percent of its workforce, as did the rideshare giant Lyft; Facebook parent company Meta looks poised to do the same. Like Wile E. Coyote, tech companies ran off the cliff long ago; only now is economic gravity starting to assert itself.
Many “unicorn” tech startups began with a few engineers and a product they wanted to sell, but over the past decade-plus, they have accrued a bloated bureaucracy of “equity”-minded h.r. activists, ESG-savvy consultants, affinity-group mavens, climate-change specialists, and many other email-caste hangers-on. Now that times are turning bad, tech companies can no longer afford to sustain a massive “court” of professional-class nobility, paying sinecures to sons and daughters of the good and the great who don’t know how to code or crunch numbers, but know how to write emails, hold useless meetings, and talk about diversity and inclusion.
Here, one is reminded of a social dynamic that took hold in the leadup to the French Revolution. In the latter half of the 18th century, France was trying to reform its increasingly dysfunctional army, and some of the reformers made an issue of the fact that commoners couldn’t get promoted to higher positions. Surely, a properly meritocratic army would be more efficient than one that saw itself as a place to park the listless, and often talentless, sons of the nobility. But all attempts to make the army accept non-nobles in commanding positions were defeated. The problem was that France now had a large class of impoverished nobles, for which some sort of exclusive jobs program was absolutely necessary. They didn’t have diversified business interests like the court nobility at Versailles; all they had was their noble privilege, and if the French state abolished the last areas where that privilege meant something, they would truly be lost.
A similar dynamic is operative in America today. The people who worked “on climate” at Twitter, now being given the ax by the perfidious Elon Musk, are openly complaining that they won’t be able to find jobs anywhere else in this economy. They are, of course, right to worry. One of the biggest and least-talked-about social questions in the West is how to economically provide for our own modern version of France’s impecunious nobles: that is, how to prop up high-status people who can’t really do much economically productive work.
In my own country, Sweden, the state picks up a lot of the slack. Here, small municipalities hire dozens or hundreds of communicators, consultants, and other plainly nonproductive personnel, and attempts to do something about it run into a very simple question: Where else are these people supposed to work? Who else would hire them? Though few will say it openly, the city of Uppsala’s nearly 100 communicators have nothing to do with communication, and everything to do with preserving social stability. It is, in essence, just part of a massive jobs program.
In America, that jobs program is only partially covered by the state. Private companies like Twitter have therefore been expected to shoulder the burden and make sure the scions of the professional-managerial class can find lucrative work, even when there is no real economic reason to pay them. That system is now buckling under the sheer amount of waste and parasitism that can no longer be covered up by cheap money and easy debt. Musk makes a useful scapegoat here, but none of this is his fault, nor could he change this dynamic if he wanted to.
In an earlier column, I ended with the following question: “Gen. Mark Milley infamously testified before a congressional hearing that he wanted to understand ‘white rage.’ But who right now is prepared for progressive, multiracial, demisexual rage, as the core social groups driving progressivism in America are hit the hardest by layoffs and the end of Silicon Valley subsidies?” That rage is no longer coming—it’s here.
Yet there is another aspect of the Musk takeover that has little to do with free speech or even ideology—although it has a great deal to do with the class interests of Big Tech censors. As a recession looms, Silicon Valley is shedding the non-essential workers it acquired when unlimited venture funding made turning a profit an afterthought. Musk happens to have taken the helm at Twitter just as this reality is asserting itself. In this sense, the revolt against his leadership is the last stand of a cohort of activist hangers-on who are about to find themselves unemployed.
Musk paid $44 billion to acquire Twitter, and all indications are that the platform isn’t worth anything close to that. Once he got access to the company’s finances, the Tesla boss realized it was losing millions of dollars every day, and that many of its employees weren’t doing much work at all. So he proceeded to do what most executives would do in this situation: He laid off some of his workers.
“Tech companies ran off the cliff long ago.”
The abrupt firing of thousands of employees solicited a new wave of outrage from Musk’s haters. But even if you remove him from the equation, Twitter couldn’t have gone much longer without massive layoffs. The same thing is happening across Silicon Valley. Last week, the online-payments company Stripe announced it would cut 14 percent of its workforce, as did the rideshare giant Lyft; Facebook parent company Meta looks poised to do the same. Like Wile E. Coyote, tech companies ran off the cliff long ago; only now is economic gravity starting to assert itself.
Many “unicorn” tech startups began with a few engineers and a product they wanted to sell, but over the past decade-plus, they have accrued a bloated bureaucracy of “equity”-minded h.r. activists, ESG-savvy consultants, affinity-group mavens, climate-change specialists, and many other email-caste hangers-on. Now that times are turning bad, tech companies can no longer afford to sustain a massive “court” of professional-class nobility, paying sinecures to sons and daughters of the good and the great who don’t know how to code or crunch numbers, but know how to write emails, hold useless meetings, and talk about diversity and inclusion.
Here, one is reminded of a social dynamic that took hold in the leadup to the French Revolution. In the latter half of the 18th century, France was trying to reform its increasingly dysfunctional army, and some of the reformers made an issue of the fact that commoners couldn’t get promoted to higher positions. Surely, a properly meritocratic army would be more efficient than one that saw itself as a place to park the listless, and often talentless, sons of the nobility. But all attempts to make the army accept non-nobles in commanding positions were defeated. The problem was that France now had a large class of impoverished nobles, for which some sort of exclusive jobs program was absolutely necessary. They didn’t have diversified business interests like the court nobility at Versailles; all they had was their noble privilege, and if the French state abolished the last areas where that privilege meant something, they would truly be lost.
A similar dynamic is operative in America today. The people who worked “on climate” at Twitter, now being given the ax by the perfidious Elon Musk, are openly complaining that they won’t be able to find jobs anywhere else in this economy. They are, of course, right to worry. One of the biggest and least-talked-about social questions in the West is how to economically provide for our own modern version of France’s impecunious nobles: that is, how to prop up high-status people who can’t really do much economically productive work.
In my own country, Sweden, the state picks up a lot of the slack. Here, small municipalities hire dozens or hundreds of communicators, consultants, and other plainly nonproductive personnel, and attempts to do something about it run into a very simple question: Where else are these people supposed to work? Who else would hire them? Though few will say it openly, the city of Uppsala’s nearly 100 communicators have nothing to do with communication, and everything to do with preserving social stability. It is, in essence, just part of a massive jobs program.
In America, that jobs program is only partially covered by the state. Private companies like Twitter have therefore been expected to shoulder the burden and make sure the scions of the professional-managerial class can find lucrative work, even when there is no real economic reason to pay them. That system is now buckling under the sheer amount of waste and parasitism that can no longer be covered up by cheap money and easy debt. Musk makes a useful scapegoat here, but none of this is his fault, nor could he change this dynamic if he wanted to.
In an earlier column, I ended with the following question: “Gen. Mark Milley infamously testified before a congressional hearing that he wanted to understand ‘white rage.’ But who right now is prepared for progressive, multiracial, demisexual rage, as the core social groups driving progressivism in America are hit the hardest by layoffs and the end of Silicon Valley subsidies?” That rage is no longer coming—it’s here.
Last edited:
Belezabro
Elite
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2021
- Messages
- 989
Great read. Never heard the term demisexual.Best Article you Could Possibly Read About What is Going on at Titter:
The Email Caste's Last Stand
Most discussions of Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter have focused on its political implications. In many accounts, Musk is engaged in a war against “the cathedral”—that is, against the dominance of professionals who have sought to make the internet more restrictive. Musk has now supposedly poked...
Most discussions of Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter have focused on its political implications. In many accounts, Musk is engaged in a war against “the cathedral”—that is, against the dominance of professionals who have sought to make the internet more restrictive. Musk has now supposedly poked the first hole in the digital Berlin Wall erected over the past half decade.
Yet there is another aspect of the Musk takeover that has little to do with free speech or even ideology—although it has a great deal to do with the class interests of Big Tech censors. As a recession looms, Silicon Valley is shedding the non-essential workers it acquired when unlimited venture funding made turning a profit an afterthought. Musk happens to have taken the helm at Twitter just as this reality is asserting itself. In this sense, the revolt against his leadership is the last stand of a cohort of activist hangers-on who are about to find themselves unemployed.
Musk paid $44 billion to acquire Twitter, and all indications are that the platform isn’t worth anything close to that. Once he got access to the company’s finances, the Tesla boss realized it was losing millions of dollars every day, and that many of its employees weren’t doing much work at all. So he proceeded to do what most executives would do in this situation: He laid off some of his workers.
“Tech companies ran off the cliff long ago.”
The abrupt firing of thousands of employees solicited a new wave of outrage from Musk’s haters. But even if you remove him from the equation, Twitter couldn’t have gone much longer without massive layoffs. The same thing is happening across Silicon Valley. Last week, the online-payments company Stripe announced it would cut 14 percent of its workforce, as did the rideshare giant Lyft; Facebook parent company Meta looks poised to do the same. Like Wile E. Coyote, tech companies ran off the cliff long ago; only now is economic gravity starting to assert itself.
Many “unicorn” tech startups began with a few engineers and a product they wanted to sell, but over the past decade-plus, they have accrued a bloated bureaucracy of “equity”-minded h.r. activists, ESG-savvy consultants, affinity-group mavens, climate-change specialists, and many other email-caste hangers-on. Now that times are turning bad, tech companies can no longer afford to sustain a massive “court” of professional-class nobility, paying sinecures to sons and daughters of the good and the great who don’t know how to code or crunch numbers, but know how to write emails, hold useless meetings, and talk about diversity and inclusion.
Here, one is reminded of a social dynamic that took hold in the leadup to the French Revolution. In the latter half of the 18th century, France was trying to reform its increasingly dysfunctional army, and some of the reformers made an issue of the fact that commoners couldn’t get promoted to higher positions. Surely, a properly meritocratic army would be more efficient than one that saw itself as a place to park the listless, and often talentless, sons of the nobility. But all attempts to make the army accept non-nobles in commanding positions were defeated. The problem was that France now had a large class of impoverished nobles, for which some sort of exclusive jobs program was absolutely necessary. They didn’t have diversified business interests like the court nobility at Versailles; all they had was their noble privilege, and if the French state abolished the last areas where that privilege meant something, they would truly be lost.
A similar dynamic is operative in America today. The people who worked “on climate” at Twitter, now being given the ax by the perfidious Elon Musk, are openly complaining that they won’t be able to find jobs anywhere else in this economy. They are, of course, right to worry. One of the biggest and least-talked-about social questions in the West is how to economically provide for our own modern version of France’s impecunious nobles: that is, how to prop up high-status people who can’t really do much economically productive work.
In my own country, Sweden, the state picks up a lot of the slack. Here, small municipalities hire dozens or hundreds of communicators, consultants, and other plainly nonproductive personnel, and attempts to do something about it run into a very simple question: Where else are these people supposed to work? Who else would hire them? Though few will say it openly, the city of Uppsala’s nearly 100 communicators have nothing to do with communication, and everything to do with preserving social stability. It is, in essence, just part of a massive jobs program.
In America, that jobs program is only partially covered by the state. Private companies like Twitter have therefore been expected to shoulder the burden and make sure the scions of the professional-managerial class can find lucrative work, even when there is no real economic reason to pay them. That system is now buckling under the sheer amount of waste and parasitism that can no longer be covered up by cheap money and easy debt. Musk makes a useful scapegoat here, but none of this is his fault, nor could he change this dynamic if he wanted to.
In an earlier column, I ended with the following question: “Gen. Mark Milley infamously testified before a congressional hearing that he wanted to understand ‘white rage.’ But who right now is prepared for progressive, multiracial, demisexual rage, as the core social groups driving progressivism in America are hit the hardest by layoffs and the end of Silicon Valley subsidies?” That rage is no longer coming—it’s here.
AgEngDawg
Legendary
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 9,799
It's a brave new world.
FreeMiner
Legendary
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2021
- Messages
- 11,595
Why They Hate Lindell.
The raw material of the ballot-gathering strategy is the phantom voter or address. Every ballot needs to tie to someone — even if only a name on a list.
Live, votable ballots accumulate at addresses where the indicated voter does not reside. Those ballots, gathered, are the inventory of electoral victory. He who gathers them can vote them.
The ballot-gathering system was frictionless until 2020. Thousands of phantom addresses inhabited every state’s voter list.
[…]
For the ballot-gathering strategy to work, Democrats need tens of thousands of phantom addresses and voters. A few is not enough. Without thousands of loose ballots tied to phantoms, the edifice comes crashing down.
They also need Republicans to do nothing.
The Wisconsin team proved, in this election, that adding even a small amount of friction – removing thousands of phantom names and identifying several hundred thousand incorrect addresses — has a massive impact on the ballot-gathering system.
Our Wisconsin election heroes applied Fractal Programming technology, funded by Mike Lindell, at scale to find and challenge phantoms. The process is explained at www.Omega4America.com.
They went to scores of county registrars and challenged thousands of phantoms — proof in hand. Quietly, below the radar, they showed registrars, whose job it is to deal with this sort of thing, that Bill Jones was not a real person. They helped clean up addresses that were wrong — either typos or fake.
Any one of those addresses was a landing pad for a loose ballot.
www.omega4america.com
The raw material of the ballot-gathering strategy is the phantom voter or address. Every ballot needs to tie to someone — even if only a name on a list.
Live, votable ballots accumulate at addresses where the indicated voter does not reside. Those ballots, gathered, are the inventory of electoral victory. He who gathers them can vote them.
The ballot-gathering system was frictionless until 2020. Thousands of phantom addresses inhabited every state’s voter list.
[…]
For the ballot-gathering strategy to work, Democrats need tens of thousands of phantom addresses and voters. A few is not enough. Without thousands of loose ballots tied to phantoms, the edifice comes crashing down.
They also need Republicans to do nothing.
The Wisconsin team proved, in this election, that adding even a small amount of friction – removing thousands of phantom names and identifying several hundred thousand incorrect addresses — has a massive impact on the ballot-gathering system.
Our Wisconsin election heroes applied Fractal Programming technology, funded by Mike Lindell, at scale to find and challenge phantoms. The process is explained at www.Omega4America.com.
They went to scores of county registrars and challenged thousands of phantoms — proof in hand. Quietly, below the radar, they showed registrars, whose job it is to deal with this sort of thing, that Bill Jones was not a real person. They helped clean up addresses that were wrong — either typos or fake.
Any one of those addresses was a landing pad for a loose ballot.
Omega4America – A FractalWeb.App Microsite
www.omega4america.com
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2021
- Messages
- 1,329
Saw this posted elsewhere.
Ivanka Trump
The World Economic Forum is an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. Incorporated as a not-for-profit foundation in 1971, and...
www.weforum.org
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 641
What is that big bright light in the sky?
Cowboy1stn10
Elite
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2021
- Messages
- 340
Similar threads
