placeholder

What Slip wrote. Although I guess i will take your word for it that you feel embarrassed. I suppose that's a fact of sorts. Not even close to dispositive, but thanks for sharing your feelings with us.

Well, it's certainly bizarre that you want to assassinate someone who's been so reasonable and sincere, according to you, in negotiations. I wonder what fate you would wish on someone who was not sincere and reasonble in their desire to negotiate. You don't leave much room for gradation, do you?

What wasn't asked was would she be the first to use nuclear weapons. And that's the key issue. It's been the policy of all the nations, apart from North Korea, that hold nuclear weapons, to rule out first strike attacks. Russia seems to be changing its tune.

Thank you for your reasoned and evidence based argument. Such a valuable contribution. Not at all just mere venting.

First off, you asked for an example. I give you one and now you're claiming that it was reasonable. What is there about the aggressive conduct of North Korea against the South that strikes you as reasonable. Keep in mind that it was the North that originally attacked the South. That it has engaged in actual hostile and murderous activities against the South since then. Infatuated much?

Has there ever been a time when bank rates are lower than gilt rates? What do you think would happen if loan rates were lower than gilt rates? You could borrow from the bank or mortage lender and buy gilts. Guaranteed profit, no? You don't think that the authorities are careful that doesn't come to pass? Am I missing something? And aren't mortgage interest rates also determined by the rates at which the lender pays on the borrowed money? Are you claiming that the cost of money to the lender is immaterial in deciding what the loan rates should be?

N. Korea insists US act first before it gives up nukes https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-north-korea-international-news-pyongyang-9ad490e00ff5458daa98edb9745aa27e

Of course evidence can be shown. He demanded big concessions be granted before there was any talk of him giving up nuclear weapons. He never backed away from that. An obvious nonstarter.

Musk is clearly looking for some magic formula that won't make a liar out of him. On the one hand, he promised to stop censoring tweets and canceling tweeters. On the other hand, major advertisers don't want to advertise in a toxic environment. Right now, 90% of Twitter's revenues come from advertising. And why should advertisers trust someone who's social media presence is pockmarked with trolling?

Interest rates available to the public are governed by the rates that government offer on their bonds. So, if a government can borrow at rates far below that 5-10 percent, it shouldn't in order to keep interest rates payments to its citizens high? And if such high interest rates are available to savers, what does that mean for people who want to borrow for a mortgage?

What do you mean by "they both took those talks seriously"? Where's your evidence that Kim showed any willingness to give up his nuclear arsenal?

What evidence is there that KIm has ever negotiated seriously? It's weird how people who condemn the Chinese leadership for its bellicosity, have their hearts melt when it comes to Kim.

Here's what you wrote: "But we are talking about the Biden administration here. His profligate spending was the major cause of inflation." The major cause? Right now core inflation in the US is at 6.6%. In the EU it's at 5,6%.

At the end of Trump's term, Kim was roundly abusing him and his administration. What evidence do you have that Kim is someone willing to genuinely negotiate?

I can think of another prominent person who put his trust in Kim's words. How did that play out?

You got some evidence that the war games are "where they practice invading North Korea" rather than defending from a North Korean attack. Is South Korea in the habit of making threats against the North?

What do you mean by South Korea leaving North Korea alone? Once North Korea got all that attention from Trump after making wild threats and firing off missiles, it learned that acting belligerently was the best way to weaken the alliance between the US and South Korea. South Korea knows that not showing determination is the best way to encourage North Korea to continue its bellicose ways.

So you think the United States should continue to show the same weakness towards North Korea that Trump did? Remember when he agreed with the North that US-South Korean joint exercises were provocative and he called them off?

Was his "profligate spending" the major cause of inflation in most of the developed world economies?

What's truly bizarre about these people is that they compulsively look for conspiracies. One huge case recently revealed evidence that's about as unambiguous as it can be that crimes were committed. They managed somehow to find that evidence suspect. Here, they're doing it again where the evidence is so obvious.

Here's how the cost is described in t that article: "SMRs can also be built in a factory and shipped to the location where they’ll eventually operate, cutting down construction costs. Magwood compared that process to manufacturing a commercial airliner, whereas constructing a traditional large nuclear power plant is more analogous to building an entire city block." No comparison of cost to solar, wind, geothermal, renewables with storage.

It took a wild leap of faith and copied the quote into google search. And against all odds, I found this: Suspect accused of politically motivated attack on Paul Pelosi was 'completely caught up in the fantasy, in the MAGA fantasy,' his boss says https://www.businessinsider.com/pelosi-suspects-boss-says-he-was-consumed-by-conspiracy-theories-2022-11

U.S. Capitol Police officers weren't watching live home security cameras when Paul Pelosi was attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wasn't in San Francisco at the time of the incident Officers from the U.S. Capitol Police have live video surveillance outside the Pelosi's San Francisco residence, but weren't watching it when David DePape, 42, allegedly attacked Paul Pelosi, the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, sources tell Fox News. The officers were monitoring a live-feed of many cameras, which include surveillance of the capitol complex, but also monitor some points away from the capitol, which include the Pelosi residence. According to sources, an officer was monitoring the feeds and saw police lights on a dark street outside the Pelosi's residence. When going through surveillance footage, the officer saw the alleged attack on Oct. 28, when DePape allegedly struck Paul Pelosi, people briefed on the incident said, according to the report. https://www.foxnews.com/us/u-s-capitol-police-officers-werent-watching-live-home-security-cameras-when-paul-pelosi-was-attacked The conspiracy addicts will probably complain that it's very suspicious that the cameras were working.

I guess you're not aware that the Capitol Police have extensive surveillance cameras at Pelosi's home in San Francisco in order to protect her. I suspect you're not going to like what those cameras reveal.

Who says that they were determined? They certainly weren't determined to sell before Musk made his ridiculously inflated offer. They weren't offering Twitter for sale. In fact, at first they resisted before capitalizing on their immense good fortune and Musk's overpriced offer. And the European rules jibe with the current rules in America. There was no indication that Twitter wanted to loosen those rules. In fact, given the threats by advertisers to abandon Twitter if Musk unleashes the hellscape, the European rules actually worked in Twitter's financial favor.