Jump to content

LosLobo

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    3,395
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

13,838 profile views

LosLobo's Achievements

Platinum Member

Platinum Member (9/14)

  • Conversation Starter
  • Very Popular Rare
  • 5 Reactions Given
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

6.2k

Reputation

  1. Thanks for the heads up! I binged watched the whole series and really enjoyed it -- great plot, great actor!
  2. While verbal assurances were given to Gorbachev about NATO not expanding, nothing was signed or legally binding. This differs from the Budapest Memorandum (1994), where the U.S., U.K., and Russia formally committed to respect and Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. The memorandum also included a commitment to support Ukraine if was attacked. This Russia violated with its annexation of Crimea and invasion of Donbas in 2014. Now, Trump wants to violate this Memorandum with his current stance on throwing Ukraine under the bus.
  3. Right! A member of the Trump cult accusing the left of being obsessed with Trump... oh, the irony!
  4. Still on the movie theatre circuit. The biopic will hit digital stores on Tuesday, February 25, 2025, the video will be available soon after that. https://thedirect.com/article/a-complete-unknown-movies-streaming-release-date-finally-gets-revealed
  5. The Norway model works fine, but only because of its unique conditions: a nationalized oil industry, a small population, high taxes, and a disciplined government that keeps political hands off the fund. The U.S. has none of these. The SWF is built on state-controlled oil profits, with Equinor (67% state-owned) and a 78% tax on petroleum. The U.S. has no nationalized oil sector—profits go to private companies. Norway’s 5.5 million people benefit far more per capita, while the U.S. has 330+ million, making a similar fund far less effective. The state is funded with a 38.2% top income tax and 25% VAT. The U.S. has no federal VAT and a lower top tax rate (37%)—raising taxes for an SWF isn’t politically viable. It ranks #4 in least corruption, while the U.S. is #24—an American SWF would be far more vulnerable to political interference. Norway ranks #2 in HDI (Human Development Index), reflecting its high life expectancy, education levels, and standard of living, with universal healthcare and higher education provided at little to no cost. In contrast, the U.S. ranks #21, relying on private wealth, employer-based systems, and student loans. Norway controls nearly 2 million barrels/day, ensuring public benefit, while the U.S. produces 12M+ barrels/day, but profits stay private—a key difference. And no, it is not socialist. Norway operates a mixed economy: capitalism with state ownership in key sectors. Private businesses thrive, economic freedom is high (#12 globally), and the welfare state is funded by high taxes, not socialism. Different systems, different realities. This model works for Norway, but it wouldn’t work in the U.S.
  6. Yet, Bernie Madoff, the biggest fraudster in financial history, was already a multi-millionaire before he started his infamous Ponzi scheme.
  7. 'And Trump will use this money for the benefit of the masses, not greedily horde it for himself'. Right! Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) are meant to boost national wealth, but they can be ripe for abuse. Due to their secrecy and lack of oversight, SWFs have often been used for corruption, fraud, and political manipulation. How SWFs Can Be Misused: Financial Secrecy: Lack of transparency makes it easy to hide illicit transactions. Political Leverage: Investments are sometimes used to influence foreign governments or reward allies, and sometimes friends. Fraud and Embezzlement: Officials may funnel funds for personal gain, luxury purchases, or political campaigns. Notable Examples: 1MDB (Malaysia): Billions were misappropriated from this SWF, funding luxury goods and political campaigns, leading to one of the largest financial frauds in history. Russia: The lack of transparency in Russia’s SWFs has led to accusations of financial secrecy, with funds used to consolidate wealth among the elite. Germany and Hitler: During WWII, Hitler used Germany’s economic assets to fund the war and personal luxuries, with much of the wealth looted from occupied countries. A significant portion was hidden in secret Swiss bank accounts, making it difficult for post-war governments to trace or recover. MBS and Kushner: Saudi Crown Prince MBS invested $2 billion into Jared Kushner’s firm, raising concerns about political influence and personal enrichment. Conclusion: While SWFs can benefit a nation, they can also be used for fraud, corruption, and political gain. Transparency and oversight are crucial to prevent these funds from being exploited for personal or political enrichment. The big question is can you trust a convicted criminal and known fraudster?
  8. With all due respect, I just couldn’t help myself with an ad hominem… It’s pretty clear you’re full of it, Yellowtail—your name is conclusive evidence of verbal diarrhea.
  9. I believe in different strokes..... --think you missed the irony of my post.
  10. Clearly, 'The Grinch Who Stole Christmas' isn't your vibe. Maybe you'd prefer something more straightforward, like a boring documentary?"
  11. Obviously, Trump was more popular than Biden—he won the election, duh! Who would have thought Murdoch, aka 'Das Reichsleiter' of the MAGA propaganda wing, would be on his knees, giving Trump more moral oral support? The poll came just days after the inauguration when the "sheep" were all in—now, the honeymoon period is over, and reality will set in with buyer's remorse. “When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one,” Trump said. After the election, Trump told NBC News’ Kristen Welker, “I won on groceries. We’re going to bring those prices way down.” Now, inflation is rising, making it unlikely the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates soon. Grocery, gasoline, and rent prices continue to climb, worsening financial strain for families and businesses. In January, meat prices rose by 0.6%, and egg prices surged by 15.2%. Meanwhile, Trump seems more focused on deals with Musk and plans for Greenland and Gaza than tackling food price hikes. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/trumpflation-trump-slammed-for-blaming-biden-after-he-breaks-day-one-promise-to-bring-prices-down/ar-AA1yUNCs https://x.com/DVNJr/status/1850528968144814369
  12. Ah, so this is what we’re doing now? For lack of a logical response, theblether’s projecting his own blether (nonsense) onto others –– Oh, the irony.
  13. Your nice precis of Article III seems to have omitted most of the relevant facts. Article III Judicial Branch Section 1 Vesting Clause The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office. ArtIII.S1.1 Overview of Judicial Vesting Clause ArtIII.S1.2 Historical Background on Judicial Review ArtIII.S1.3 Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review Read on....... https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-3/section-1/
  14. Your response sidesteps my argument and serves up a mixed salad of logical fallacies: False Dichotomy: You’re acting like only SCOTUS can settle national issues, but district and appellate courts have jurisdiction over federal matters. It’s not either/or. Appeal to Authority: SCOTUS isn’t the only court with authority. Lower courts handle federal law all the time before SCOTUS gets involved. Strawman: I’m not saying a district judge can override the president on everything. They can block unlawful presidential actions, especially if there’s abuse of power or a constitutional violation. Slippery Slope: Claiming that district judges ruling on national issues leads to chaos is unfounded fear-mongering. Hasty Generalization: Disagreements between circuits don’t invalidate a district judge’s ruling. The system resolves those through appeals, not by breaking down. In short, federal judges can rule on national matters, and district judges can stop presidential actions if they overstep. You’re making this unnecessarily complicated.
  15. You could read the Constitution Article III —it’s just that simple.

×
×
  • Create New...