US franchises at risk ?

[SharperDingaan]

Social media only works for you so long as you continue to deliver the goods; fail, and they start to trash talk you ......

 

BTC sold off in a very big way today; liquidity being accumulated ahead of Monday. Given that BTC price is also a function of liquidity... as soon as the tariffs are announced, expect another big drop. Leaks don't get onto social media unless the platform owners allow it ...  and so far, with all these clumsy dismissals... it has been remarkably quite. Orange Boy needs to turn it around within days .... or the honeymoon is over and the grenades start going off.

 

Dance, Orange Boy ... dance! Is Elon the boss, or are you just the car jockey working for tips? Twitter wants to know!!

 

SD

 

[Ulti]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/opinion/trump-putin-ukraine.html
 

again I don’t consider Thomas Friedman to be a bleeding heart liberal/ progressive…. And had I known of his approach to Putin prior to the elections while he was campaigning/.? Who knows…  Would be interesting to see these types of election results….

[cubsfan]

39 minutes ago, Ulti said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/opinion/trump-putin-ukraine.html
 

again I don’t consider Thomas Friedman to be a bleeding heart liberal/ progressive…. And had I known of his approach to Putin prior to the elections while he was campaigning/.? Who knows…  Would be interesting to see these types of election results….

 

Well, it's no surprise as Thomas Friedman strongly endorsed Kamala Harris, a total bozo.

 

He says Trump wants to be President for life, just like Putin and President Xi.

He repeatedly calls Trump a chump and stupid.

Friedman thinks he could run the US economy much better than Trump.

He calls Republicans sycophants.

 

I'll take my chances with the economy with Scott Bessant. Tom is pretty damn radical.

 

All this well before this article.  

[Charlie]

12 hours ago, Viking said:

It's like a bunch of kids in a playground. And the big kid is thumping the weakest kid. The other kids are watching mesmerized. Some kids are cheering on the big kid. Others kids are watching and their stomach is turning over. Like I said, what is going on today just seems so surreal (to me).

+1

 

@Viking

Over the last month I had this picture a lot of times in my mind.

The difference was that the big kid is sitting on a mountain of sweets and is bullying all smaller kids and is yelling:

"I want more!"

"Everything is unfair!"

"I am God!"

 

One kid is watching and smiling. It´s Elon.

 

You could probably getting rich, selling this picture. 

Edited Wednesday at 11:25 AM by Charlie

[james22]

One aspect of this that people continually forget is that Trump is less predictable than other world leaders or groups.

 

Take an example. European countries and the EU as an institution will predictably meet, form a committee charged with forming a committee to write a white paper to make recommendations that member states will ignore that the EU will then form another committee to investigate why. Totally predictable. They do not use leverage and they are predictable.

 

Trump is the exact opposite: he will use leverage and is not predictable in specifically how. Keep this unpredictability in mind when someone tells you they know exactly what he is going to do

 

 

[james22]

Anyone remember Elektra: Assassin (1986)?

 

With Garrett as President at the end?

 

 

[james22]

I knew the son of a bitch would fold.

 

You see, he thinks I'm crazy.

 

 

[Ulti]

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/25/how-trumps-tariffs-on-mexico-and-canada-will-sweep-across-us-states.html

 

good article on how tariffs affect each state differently 

[DooDiligence]

6 hours ago, Charlie said:

+1

 

@Viking

Over the last month I had this picture a lot of times in my mind.

The difference was that the big kid is sitting on a mountain of sweets and is bullying all smaller kids and is yelling:

"I want more!"

"Everything is unfair!"

"I am God!"

 

One kid is watching and smiling. It´s Elon.

 

You could probably getting rich, selling this picture. 

 

The thirst will never be satisfied.

 

[james22]

17 hours ago, Ulti said:

. . . currently reading SPQR by Mary Beard . . .

 

OT: liking it?

[Ulti]

So far fantastic… I’m partial to Roman history for a variety of reasons… She’s articulate with an easy writing style to comprehend….starts of with the Catalinarian conspiracy and Cicero ( which is as far as I’ve gotten , )but the books delves into all aspects of Roman life at all levels with the usage of modern day archeological knowledge. Came out in 2015 and , I think , she shows why Roman  history still remains very relevant today.. Book won all sorts of accolades in 2015

[james22]

38 minutes ago, Ulti said:

So far fantastic…

 

Thanks. I'll add to the pile.

[flesh]

I think this debate might elucidate some of the ideas on tariffs. I be always been a libertarian so I had to deal with some cognitive dissonance to get on board with the idea. Where Im at now is simply this.. against who and how large and why? If you can’t answer those questions regardless of the country involved.. you haven’t begun. 
 

min reading Schopenhauer atm and it takes all my focus but I’ll come around and add my 2c later. 
 

Short takes. 
 

Greenland.. depends on the deal.. do they want to come and are they compensated? It could help with lasting peace as the north melts and previously unusable land and waterways create new lands to fight over. Who do you want to have them? Obviously force/violence is unacceptable. 
 

Canada as a state obviously can’t be forced and won’t be. Personally I’d rather be under usa laws and taxes but this is a nothing burger.

 

doge.. Keynes was right some might say but I’ve read him and the part where after stimulating you pay down debt never happens. You can’t cut anything except maybe defense under democrat rule. Under Biden the govt head count accelerated. If we are ever going to cut spending it has to be forced.. just like Obamacare was. It has to be fast and ferocious. The dems will just stimulate and add govt headcount again to pad their economic numbers so daddy’s got to do it. 
 

dalio in a recent interview says the magic number is getting the deficit to 3% of gdp.. everything falls in line there. Interest rates on govt debt drops independent of the fed. Saves 100s of billions in interest costs annually. I’d cut a lot more than trumps discussed so far but I’m a libertarian. I’d also let top earners fed rate go to 39% for now. I’d have a different sort of progressive tax rate. Based on how many years you’ve made x income the more years your rate slightly ratchets up.. let people get rich first get into the game. 
 

ukraine costs to much. Whether is 200b or 300b with no end in sight. People are dying. I would not let my son fight for a slice of land and die for it. I certainly wouldn’t. We can’t afford it. Recently macron said Europe gave 40% or 60% of the money to Ukraine but that eu will get the rest back in the form of frozen Russian assets. Biden did not do anything but give. We need the money back. If the eu keeps more I’m sure they won’t mention it. Certainly everyone doesn’t expect usa to give 100s of bs out of the kindness of our hearts indefinitely and to anyone? Again it depends on the final deal.. if we get 300b in minerals with a cap there.. what’s the big deal. You pay for defense now or you pay later.

 

if the eu wants to pay and fight forever then go ahead. 
 

btw it’s obvious to me knowing trump that he’s framing this in terms of Putin not all bad and Zelensky not all good because he knows it’s easier to get Putin to bite on a deal this way allowing the massive ego of Putin to remain in tact is likely the only way a deal gets done. We need this done. People dying for stupid land.. costing us and we can’t afford it. My background is sales and marketing though so maybe other haven’t considered this. 

 

 

 

 

[cubsfan]

34 minutes ago, flesh said:

I think this debate might elucidate some of the ideas on tariffs. I be always been a libertarian so I had to deal with some cognitive dissonance to get on board with the idea. Where Im at now is simply this.. against who and how large and why? If you can’t answer those questions regardless of the country involved.. you haven’t begun. 
 

min reading Schopenhauer atm and it takes all my focus but I’ll come around and add my 2c later. 
 

Short takes. 
 

Greenland.. depends on the deal.. do they want to come and are they compensated? It could help with lasting peace as the north melts and previously unusable land and waterways create new lands to fight over. Who do you want to have them? Obviously force/violence is unacceptable. 
 

Canada as a state obviously can’t be forced and won’t be. Personally I’d rather be under usa laws and taxes but this is a nothing burger.

 

doge.. Keynes was right some might say but I’ve read him and the part where after stimulating you pay down debt never happens. You can’t cut anything except maybe defense under democrat rule. Under Biden the govt head count accelerated. If we are ever going to cut spending it has to be forced.. just like Obamacare was. It has to be fast and ferocious. The dems will just stimulate and add govt headcount again to pad their economic numbers so daddy’s got to do it. 
 

dalio in a recent interview says the magic number is getting the deficit to 3% of gdp.. everything falls in line there. Interest rates on govt debt drops independent of the fed. Saves 100s of billions in interest costs annually. I’d cut a lot more than trumps discussed so far but I’m a libertarian. I’d also let top earners fed rate go to 39% for now. I’d have a different sort of progressive tax rate. Based on how many years you’ve made x income the more years your rate slightly ratchets up.. let people get rich first get into the game. 
 

ukraine costs to much. Whether is 200b or 300b with no end in sight. People are dying. I would not let my son fight for a slice of land and die for it. I certainly wouldn’t. We can’t afford it. Recently macron said Europe gave 40% or 60% of the money to Ukraine but that eu will get the rest back in the form of frozen Russian assets. Biden did not do anything but give. We need the money back. If the eu keeps more I’m sure they won’t mention it. Certainly everyone doesn’t expect usa to give 100s of bs out of the kindness of our hearts indefinitely and to anyone? Again it depends on the final deal.. if we get 300b in minerals with a cap there.. what’s the big deal. You pay for defense now or you pay later.

 

if the eu wants to pay and fight forever then go ahead. 
 

btw it’s obvious to me knowing trump that he’s framing this in terms of Putin not all bad and Zelensky not all good because he knows it’s easier to get Putin to bite on a deal this way allowing the massive ego of Putin to remain in tact is likely the only way a deal gets done. We need this done. People dying for stupid land.. costing us and we can’t afford it. My background is sales and marketing though so maybe other haven’t considered this. 

 

 

+1 - a well though out and reasoned post in all of your points.

 

My background is the same - 15 years negotiating contracts with nice people and many people like Trump. Much bravado and unrealistic first volleys.  So what do you do as the other side?

You keep your cool, you try to move the ball, you keep defending your terms, above all you keep talking!   You do this ESPECIALLY in the early stages!  The time to cut off negotiation is when you are essentially at your limit - and both sides need to reassess if there are deal terms to be made.

Elapsed time is very important.  But to NOT negotiate is the way to blow your deal up forever.

 

IF there is a deal to be made - you eventually come to something where NOBODY got everything they 

want. Negotiating with many major corporations is much like negotiating with a country. Committees and multiple individuals involved. The first volleys are always win/lose - meaning, if your stupid enough to cave - they get everything and you lose.

 

So many corporate buyers and purchasing departments live by "Art of the Deal".

 

IF you don't understand what's happening - you'll never stay engaged enough (talking) to get to a "fair deal".  Often, the fair deal is one that neither side loves.

[flesh]

Btw I think we could actually learn from each other by steel manning each other as opposed to below. Learning for us is what important please. Therefore no more “orange man”. Guys, after all the mistakes you’ve made investing.. and the certainty you mistakenly had beforehand.. recognize this applies everywhere. Unless we get down to cogito ergo sum or kants “thing in itself” something else is always more fundamental. It can’t be otherwise. 

 

A “faux pas” in a debate refers to a social blunder or mistake that can negatively affect the debater’s credibility or effectiveness. Here are some common faux pas to avoid:

1. Personal Attacks (Ad Hominem): Attacking the opponent personally instead of addressing their arguments. This weakens your position and can make you seem unprofessional.

2. Interrupting: Constantly cutting off your opponent or not allowing them to speak can make you appear disrespectful and can undermine your argument.

3. Lack of Evidence: Making claims without supporting evidence or relying on personal anecdotes instead of facts or studies. This can damage your credibility.

4. Overgeneralizing: Making sweeping statements or using absolutes like “always” or “never” without solid proof can make your argument seem illogical and exaggerated.

5. Not Addressing Counterarguments: Ignoring valid counterarguments or refusing to engage with the other side’s points can make you appear evasive or unprepared.

6. Appealing to Emotion: Relying too heavily on emotional appeal rather than logical reasoning can backfire, especially if it feels manipulative or lacking substance.

7. Failing to Listen: Not paying attention to the opponent’s points or failing to engage with their arguments properly can show poor debate skills and can weaken your own case.

8. Misquoting or Misinformation: Using inaccurate facts or misquoting the opponent can quickly undermine your integrity and weaken your argument.

9. Overloading with Information: Bombarding the audience with too much information or irrelevant details can confuse and lose your audience’s attention.

10. Being Overly Aggressive: Being too combative or aggressive can alienate the audience or your opponent, making you appear less reasonable or composed.

 

Avoiding these faux pas can help maintain a strong, logical, and respectful debate, enhancing both your credibility and effectiveness.

[Gregmal]

Just now, flesh said:

Btw I think we could actually learn from each other by steel manning each other as opposed to below. Learning for us is what important please. Therefore no more “orange man”. Guys, after all the mistakes you’ve made investing.. and the certainty you mistakenly had beforehand.. recognize this applies everywhere. Unless we get down to cogito ergo sum or kants “thing in itself” something else is always more fundamental. It can’t be otherwise. 

Yea, I think this highlights why maybe Dinar and Dalal should get a welcome back as well. Because its still very rampant and @Parsad does his best, but at the same time when the refs call em as they see em, how they see em is important. 100% a lot of the same antagonistic or troll behavior from one side routinely gets through the sieves. Whether it orange man stuff or just constant whining and calling policy(IE stuff like tariffs) stupid with the analytical backing of a 5 year old....that stuff isn't policed the same as when Dinar or Dalal hit back, often with more detail and backing than presented on the other side. 

[cubsfan]

4 minutes ago, flesh said:

Btw I think we could actually learn from each other by steel manning each other as opposed to below. Learning for us is what important please. Therefore no more “orange man”. Guys, after all the mistakes you’ve made investing.. and the certainty you mistakenly had beforehand.. recognize this applies everywhere. Unless we get down to cogito ergo sum or kants “thing in itself” something else is always more fundamental. It can’t be otherwise. 

 

A “faux pas” in a debate refers to a social blunder or mistake that can negatively affect the debater’s credibility or effectiveness. Here are some common faux pas to avoid:

1. Personal Attacks (Ad Hominem): Attacking the opponent personally instead of addressing their arguments. This weakens your position and can make you seem unprofessional.

2. Interrupting: Constantly cutting off your opponent or not allowing them to speak can make you appear disrespectful and can undermine your argument.

3. Lack of Evidence: Making claims without supporting evidence or relying on personal anecdotes instead of facts or studies. This can damage your credibility.

4. Overgeneralizing: Making sweeping statements or using absolutes like “always” or “never” without solid proof can make your argument seem illogical and exaggerated.

5. Not Addressing Counterarguments: Ignoring valid counterarguments or refusing to engage with the other side’s points can make you appear evasive or unprepared.

6. Appealing to Emotion: Relying too heavily on emotional appeal rather than logical reasoning can backfire, especially if it feels manipulative or lacking substance.

7. Failing to Listen: Not paying attention to the opponent’s points or failing to engage with their arguments properly can show poor debate skills and can weaken your own case.

8. Misquoting or Misinformation: Using inaccurate facts or misquoting the opponent can quickly undermine your integrity and weaken your argument.

9. Overloading with Information: Bombarding the audience with too much information or irrelevant details can confuse and lose your audience’s attention.

10. Being Overly Aggressive: Being too combative or aggressive can alienate the audience or your opponent, making you appear less reasonable or composed.

 

Avoiding these faux pas can help maintain a strong, logical, and respectful debate, enhancing both your credibility and effectiveness.

 

Absolutely - stick to the issues and the 4 or 5 things that you feel are really important!

The rest is all noise. Successful negotiations is about results.

[DooDiligence]

24 minutes ago, flesh said:

Btw I think we could actually learn from each other by steel manning each other as opposed to below. Learning for us is what important please. Therefore no more “orange man”. Guys, after all the mistakes you’ve made investing.. and the certainty you mistakenly had beforehand.. recognize this applies everywhere. Unless we get down to cogito ergo sum or kants “thing in itself” something else is always more fundamental. It can’t be otherwise. 

 

A “faux pas” in a debate refers to a social blunder or mistake that can negatively affect the debater’s credibility or effectiveness. Here are some common faux pas to avoid:

1. Personal Attacks (Ad Hominem): Attacking the opponent personally instead of addressing their arguments. This weakens your position and can make you seem unprofessional.

2. Interrupting: Constantly cutting off your opponent or not allowing them to speak can make you appear disrespectful and can undermine your argument.

3. Lack of Evidence: Making claims without supporting evidence or relying on personal anecdotes instead of facts or studies. This can damage your credibility.

4. Overgeneralizing: Making sweeping statements or using absolutes like “always” or “never” without solid proof can make your argument seem illogical and exaggerated.

5. Not Addressing Counterarguments: Ignoring valid counterarguments or refusing to engage with the other side’s points can make you appear evasive or unprepared.

6. Appealing to Emotion: Relying too heavily on emotional appeal rather than logical reasoning can backfire, especially if it feels manipulative or lacking substance.

7. Failing to Listen: Not paying attention to the opponent’s points or failing to engage with their arguments properly can show poor debate skills and can weaken your own case.

8. Misquoting or Misinformation: Using inaccurate facts or misquoting the opponent can quickly undermine your integrity and weaken your argument.

9. Overloading with Information: Bombarding the audience with too much information or irrelevant details can confuse and lose your audience’s attention.

10. Being Overly Aggressive: Being too combative or aggressive can alienate the audience or your opponent, making you appear less reasonable or composed.

 

Avoiding these faux pas can help maintain a strong, logical, and respectful debate, enhancing both your credibility and effectiveness.

 

You just listed every single disingenuous debate tactic used (on a continuous 24 hour basis, I might add) by "the Orange Man" and every loud mouthed douchenozzle who supports him. Peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

 

edit: I won't see your response because I'm blocking you now. Go ahead and waste your breath anyway. I know you will.

Edited Wednesday at 07:04 PM by DooDiligence

[cubsfan]

4 minutes ago, DooDiligence said:

 

You just listed every single disingenuous debate tactic used (on a continuous 24 hour basis, I might add) by "the Orange Man" and every loud mouthed douchenozzle who supports him. Peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

 

edit: I won't see your response because I'm blocking you now. Go ahead and waste your breath anyway. I know you will.

 

@flesh  Sorry dude - you found your hater.  And of course, there is no accountability from the opposite side as Greg said - because they are always right.  Nice work @DooDiligence

[KFRCanuk]

11 minutes ago, DooDiligence said:

 

edit: I won't see your response because I'm blocking you now. Go ahead and waste your breath anyway. I know you will.

OMG! I never knew we could do that. Thanks!

[Gregmal]

Yea, Dalal and especially Dinar have contributed more in a 30 minute window on a random Tuesday than some of these other "concerned citizens" have contributed in years of their membership here. Im all for accessibility and accountability, but at some point, quality over quantity.....

[flesh]

7 minutes ago, DooDiligence said:

 

You just listed every single disingenuous debate tactic used (on a continuous 24 hour basis, I might add) by "the Orange Man" and every loud mouthed douchenozzle who supports him. Peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

 

edit: I won't see your response because I'm blocking you now. Go ahead and waste your breath anyway. I know you will.

So let’s try to steel man this. 
 

Am I the orange man? Do I have a history of being a loudmouth? Did I say I support him or could one infer that some of his ideas I might support in some ways but not all? Do I have a history of peddling bullshit? Does “every” supporter of trump deserve the moniker “douchnozzle”? 
 

does trump use many of these debate tactics? Yes. I often don’t feel it’s substantiated. But not always. 

 

in what context does he use them? As a president. 
 

Are we presidents? 
 

Does this response add to us learning? 
 

Does my response feel honest or am I possessed by an animus? 
 

 

 

[Ulti]

https://www.fedsmith.com/2024/07/22/biden-trump-changes-federal-workforce/… Seems like both increased head counts

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/

https://www.newsweek.com/how-bill-clinton-shrunk-federal-government-30-years-before-doge-2032893

Again there are many ways to approach 

reducing the deficit and reigning in federal employees and antiquated systems… Somehow those who recommend the “ slash and burn method “ blaming shit just on the demo rats and not including the Trumpican/ Republican Party in this mess we are in , seem at the very least myopic …A balanced and rational approach is best( just my opinion)….

 

and I’m just curious… project 2025 has been years in the making waiting for a conservative president and to remake government… why the slash and burn approach without a rational plan in place? Maybe I’m missing something ?

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/a-guide-to-project-2025/

 

1 hour ago, flesh said:

accelerated. If we are ever going to cut spending it has to be forced.. just like Obamacare was. It has to be fast and ferocious. The dems will just stimulate and add govt headcount again to pad their economic numbers so daddy’s got to do it. 

1 hour ago, flesh said:

. Under Biden the govt head count accelerated. If we are ever going to cut spending it has to be 

[cubsfan]

5 minutes ago, flesh said:

So let’s try to steel man this. 
 

Am I the orange man? Do I have a history of being a loudmouth? Did I say I support him or could one infer that some of his ideas I might support in some ways but not all? Do I have a history of peddling bullshit? Does “every” supporter of trump deserve the moniker “douchnozzle”? 
 

does trump use many of these debate tactics? Yes. I often don’t feel it’s substantiated. But not always. 

 

in what context does he use them? As a president. 
 

Are we presidents? 
 

Does this response add to us learning? 
 

Does my response feel honest or am I possessed by an animus? 
 

 

Here's what funny to me - when I saw your original post - I thought - we haven't heard from you forever! ...... so much for being reasonable.

[hardcorevalue]

It's so frustrating watching Americans joke about what as their closet ally being annexed.

It's hard to explain how much Canadians view of the US has changed in the past two months. 

 

Literally undoing decades of goodwill. 

It's kind of depressing really. 

Then talking about invading foreign countries, Nato members and selling out Ukraine. It's just so bizarre. 

 

Interesting times to say the least.