Jimmy Wales: Libertarian that ended up creating perhaps the most successful collectivist project of all time.

Do not disassemble a CRT on a whim. Even if you’re being careful, it can go wrong. There’s strong magnets, glass under pressure, capacitors that can hold a deadly charge for a long time, and toxic chemicals.

$400 check, and $400k in PPP loans that I will totally repay (if I have to)

They attract mosquitoes

I should be cynical about AI and labor displacement, but…

Does anyone actually want to wreck their bodies by walking all over a giant warehouse and lifting heavy unwieldy objects?

Now the robots will do all of that.

We’ll just need some humans to uh… follow them around the warehouse… and move them when they break down. (This is totally different, you see.)

And do the original task that glitched it out. And dodge all of the other robots while doing so. And be paid less because we have robots now.

Yall are worried about banks when a massive bet on AI makes up over 30% of the S&P 500?

And when you smash their nests, birds don’t lay eggs

I’m glad there are other people out here trying to explain how money actually works. I gave up a while ago cuz I got sick of being treated like a crazy person.

I think that, partially, people don’t like being told their folk wisdom is wrong… but more importantly, they don’t wanna believe that the people in power are either just as misinformed or deliberately lying.

Eldritch is right, but it’s kinda like Newtonian physics vs general relativity: you can think of (federal) taxes as “funding the government” and it’s not a terrible approximation. But it’s not the reality.

The reality is more like what Eldritch said: money is spent into existence, and taxed out of existence. The issuer of a currency doesn’t need to take the currency from you in order to spend it — they need to destroy it so that their newly-printed currency is actually worth chasing after.

Sounds like a distinction without a difference, right?

Except it matters when we talk about “tariffs funding the government” (cuz they don’t) or “how are we gonna pay for something like the green new deal?” (paying for it is the easy part, controlling inflation is the real constraint).

When we talk about major economic initiatives, it kinda matters for people to understand how money actually works. Musk, for example, had no clue and thought he had uncovered some massive scandal when he gained access to the federal payment system and was confused at how the funds don’t actually come from anywhere: https://stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/elon-musk-discovers-the-magic-of

supporting

These are people who heard “trade deficit” and thought “deficit? That’s a bad word!”

We were getting a ton of stuff from other countries for cheap, meanwhile those countries either couldn’t afford our stuff or bought it at an absurd premium.

That is not supporting the other countries, it’s exploiting them.

The funny thing is, I’m like… Yeah, we should probably stop exploiting them. And in that sense, the tariffs are a good thing. Buuut the price of doing that is being paid disproportionately by working class people.

If it was more equitably implemented, I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with a more tariff-based USA.

“This is probably not a Hatch Act violation, because it’s not tied to an election,” Cynthia Brown, senior ethics counsel at the non-partisan ethics watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), told Forbes.

Not tied to an election? What? What rock are you living under?

“The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent”

The real Turing test

The vaccine only contains the part of the virus that trigger an immune response, not the parts that take over your cells and wreak havoc on your body.

In addition, the post-exposure version of the hep b vaccine will contain a dose of immunoglobulin that gives temporary immunity to the disease. So it’s like training wheels while your body starts to produce its own immune response.

Vaccines can be prophylactic or therapeutic. In this case, it’s a post-exposure prophylactic, because it’s administered after exposure to a pathogen but before the disease.

some kind of man

Wording is very careful to not offend the alcohol industry.

“Growing skepticism of alcohol’s benefits”

Why not “Growing awareness of alcohol’s harms”?