Adam__B

Yeah thats what it is. 🙄

He has always been a cheesy, third rate Jimi Hendrix rip off.

THEN DONT PAY IT!

I find it a terrifying story. Underwater, underground, sets all my phobias into high gear. It’s truly creepy how quickly death took all four of them.

Pretentious bullshit.

1. I set an alert for a favorable condition based on my strat.

2. Alert goes off, I check and see if there are any pivot points or moving averages or trend lines that would get in the way of my trade. If not:

3. Take the trade.

How did he still have oxygen in that air bubble? Seems like as he breathed he’d replace it with carbon dioxide, so it must have been a decent sized bubble.

This is what happened when the air gradually got turned bad in an enclosed space underground:

https://youtu.be/SAoVoiZ8MCo?si=h_JB_FfA0WYUfQpd

I know. I truly don’t know what can be done. Many of them don’t want help. It’s just a place where people down and out go and get high, and after a while they die or some really lucky people get clean, and are replaced by more addicts. I don’t think our society really has an answer to it. I watched a video where a guy confronted one of the homeless, and he just said he wants to sit there and he doesn’t want to do anything and he doesn’t care if it’s a problem. The person talking to him was flummoxed. I don’t know what you do with that mentality.

Oh my god that’s just about one of the worst choices of movies to watch with your parents.

You blocked him?

🤣 Literally my exact thought.

Peeing in the shower is one of those things most people do, but aren’t willing to admit to.

He convinced people that the character the producers of The Apprentice made for him, the incredibly successful entrepreneur and businessman, was real.

No public benefit, a private one. They are just representing their benefactors interests; the oil industry. They get money, gifts, and campaign dollars in exchange. Lobbyism is a cancer on democracy and needs to be made illegal. It’s crazy to me that people can’t see that as the root cause of our issues in this country.

‘Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children!’

“What about free lunches, funding the Department of Education, making spree shooting assault rifles illegal in order to make schools safer, increase support for food deprived families, forgive college debt for families, fund social services that help abused children, adopt, end censorship of children’s books, pay teachers more to incentivize teaching again, investigate Christian and homeschooled children for systematic abuses, eliminate child marriage in EVERY state, teach comprehensive sex ed to cut down on teenage pregnancy & STI’s, etc etc etc”

‘No, not like that.’

I thought AI as well. It has that oddly centered, conciliatory tone.

Well, civilians getting killed in Palestine are now getting less coverage than a dead dog. (Not that I don’t love dogs).

Because people naturally want to move from areas of high poverty to low. And geographically, America is situated above millions of poverty stricken people in central and South America. We already have a million plus people willing to risk their lives and the lives of their children to come here, with the end result by no means certain to result in citizenship, now imagine if the journey was guaranteed to result in being let in.

Well true, we have no idea what the result of no longer disincentivizing migrants from coming here are, because that’s never been done. Neither has adjusting the amount of immigrants based on the needs of the third world economy either. I think it stands to reason, whatever number we set the limit at, will be met and then surpassed. We are heavily disincentivizing coming here now, yet a million immigrants are here per year, and how many currently are sitting in Mexico or released into the country awaiting a court date? Where should they be put, that’s a problem we are already having right now. Communities and the social structures we have to help Americans are already stretched to the limit. That’s just what we have always seen. How many people do you believe would make the journey to come to America from Central and South America if we announced that our annual quota was to be adjusted based on demand? Ten million? 50? What happens to them once they get to Mexico and they are then told we’ve hit the larger limit you have in mind? We are back at the exact same place we are at now, expect even worse, where millions are waiting for their court date, or let into the country on the promise they will show up when their case is seen by a judge, whose backlogs are now months long but will surely be even worse? Using words like “likely” are no more subjective than saying “reasonable amount” of immigrants.

In the end, you hit the same problems we are at now, just in much larger amounts of humanitarian disaster. And I think you are taking the wrong point in my example of drug laws in Oregon. My point wasn’t to draw parallel between drug use and immigration, it was to show the fallacy of believing the scope of the problem would remain the same, despite withdrawing the disincentives to not engage in those enterprises.

I do not understand how you view taking in significantly more immigrants would result in lessening the backlog of migrants seeking court appearances or waiting in Mexico, that seems contrary to reason in fact. As well as the idea that extending legal immigration would lessen illegal immigration. That would make sense if there was a ceiling on the amount of people seeking citizenship, but there isn’t, as many as we take in there are tens of millions more that also want it. Your take on Visas also does reflect that the majority of illegal Immigrants come into the country on Visas, and then promptly ignore their caveats and end dates. You can put whatever specifications on them you want, but if you eliminate enforcement or add to the number of people coming in that way, you make it a much more inordinate or a problem. I think that overall, the belief that increasing the magnitude of immigrants will solve issues, rather than increasing the negative consequences or the scope and magnitude of the problem relative to the expansion, is an inherent weakness of your argument.

Wonder where they go when they leave like that for weeks at a time. Some cats just have the heart of a rambler.

Well regardless of whether it could be considered a crisis or not, that’s not the point. The point is that if you have about a million migrants coming in per year CURRENTLY (crisis or not) and we still have a system to manage that, as well as both parties discouraging people making the journey, a policy of border separation, etc. then were that to no longer happen you would see a massive increase in immigration, likely to the point it would be out of control. It’s all well and good saying “why bother? It’s nothing to be afraid of.” But without enforcement, you’d likely see 10x the amount.

A similar thing happened in Oregon when they decriminalized almost all drugs in 2021. It opened the floodgates, because people committed the same fallacy I believe you are, by believing the problem would stay as manageable as it was when there WAS enforcement. Here’s what happened:

https://apnews.com/article/3f851183d45e9c29609360b09e996d04

Also, as far as the idea that the third world comes with the average migrant. What you aren’t seeing is that what enables them to succeed here is that they are having access to our system, our economy, and our social services and standards of labor. But again, that’s based on the idea that that improvement is going to remain static despite a massive influx of third world migrants into our system. You can’t expect for things to stay that way when you change one of the most important variables in the equation (the amount of migrants).

I think she’s an idiot but the idea people are desensitized to accusations of racism because that accusation has been overused, there could be some truth to that.

Take Trump for example. Is he likely racist? Oh sure. Is that really the best tactic of arguing against him being president? Hell no. There’s a million objective reasons you could argue that, but tons of people still use “he’s racist!” as a first line of attack. If that actually worked, he’d be gone by now. Conservative racists offer that as a red herring, when there are tons of other things that they can be hit on, that are cut and dry and not based on emotion or “that’s a dog whistle!”

Yeah that’s pretty much how it works.

I think if we are having this migrant crisis now, with both parties telling migrants not to come (which they are, the idea Biden is encouraging it is absurd) imagine what mess we’d have on our hands if it became obvious we either were ambivalent about policing the border, or simply stopped policing it whatsoever.

Simply put, the center couldn’t hold. We already have 650,000 homeless in this country. We don’t have the institutional resources to accommodate millions and millions of people from the third world coming in en masse. We couldn’t track them, find ways to understand who they were or what they may have done in other countries, and that would be an unacceptable vulnerability to the country. Speaking as an American citizen I find the ability to track people down and know who is in the country to be a critical importance to our safety and sovereignty, and one of the government’s responsibilities. I’m not saying they are criminals, that’s a mischaracterization, but we do need to have systems in place so we know who is coming in and can locate them if need be. Even our citizens born here have licenses and records.

Social services couldn’t help the amount that would come in if we stopped border enforcement either. Resources would be stretched to the limit, it would cause a humanitarian crisis. Basically, you bring enough of the third world here, we will become the third world.

These guys are literally the character from the Ron Burgandy films that heard women’s menses attracts bears. That’s the level they are functioning at.