Political Discussion

AnthonyI said:
Exactly, not only is there plenty of blame to go around, but I think I remember Psaki throwing just this notion back in Doocy's face a few days ago when he tossed out another "got ya" attempt at a question, lol.
Click to expand...
That fuckin’ guy, he’s goddamn Steve Doocey’s from Fox & Friends son. Talk about nepotism at its worst. He’s not even good at his “gotcha” questioning Psaki smokes him every time. His questions are just regurgitations of Fox New chyrons.
 
Last edited:
TenderLovingKiller® said:
That fuckin’ guy, he’s goddamn Steve Doocey’s from Fox & Friends son. Talk about nepotism at its worse. He’s not even good at his “gotcha” questioning Psaki smokes him every time. His questions are just regurgitations of Fox New chyrons.
Click to expand...
Oh I know who he is, I'm pretty sure everyone knows who he is judging by the eye-rolling that's ever present in the reporters around him, lol. I do wish Psaki would stick around though, I can't imagine a replacement that can even come close to the way she presents herself.
 
RenegadeMonster said:




Only Fans has been in the news a lot recently. First for saying they were going to ban porn on their platform to saying they reversed their decision after listening to their community and learning they would lose most of their business if they went forward with it.

But take a look at the above headline and the money that former ICU nurse makes and really just think about that and what that means.

Maybe 200k is not the norm per month on Only Fans, but the average person who does have an Only Fans account makes far more than they would ever working a "real job" with a college degree.

Most of the influencers I follow on Instagram do in fact have Only Fans accounts now. Most are just a paid instagram with posts like they post on Instagram more often or full photo shoots instead of one photo. Some will venture as far as being topless occasionally, but none do porn. And they have talked about Only Fans and why they created one.

For example, one influencer created a YouTube video explaining why she created an Only Fans. She explained that followers had been asking her to create one for some time, but she always said no, it's not for me. Posting nude pictures of herself online isn't for her.

But then COVID hit, and at the heart of lockdown she found herself furloughed. She decided to give Only Fans a try for a month to supplement her income and make rent. She advertised no nudes / topless to avoid the "she's a scammer" reviews for not posting that kind of material and basically said my Only Fans will have similar posts to what's on my Instagram, just more often. And she made $7,000 after Only Fans 20% fees in her first week. $30,000 in her first month.

She told all her subscribers to not renew. That she wasn't going to continue after the first month. But virtually everyone renewed so she continued to post rather than deal with cancellations and refunds. 6 months later she was making $50,000 a month, paid off her student loans and purchased her first house.

She went on to explain how much money you make depends on what your willing to show. The more your willing to show the more money you can make. She explained that those willing to show it all make more than $100,000k a week. And in the case of the top 1% of content creators on Only Fans, that can be over a million a month.

But just think about that for a moment. If an average Only Fans account can make $7k a week or more, what does that say about what jobs and salaries pay us currently? Dare I say it's a sign of "not enough" if many younger people are choosing to make a living off Only Fans or still have a job but have an Only Fans to actually pay the bills? And Only Fans being one of the few options for younger adults to actually live a comfortable middle class lifestyle.
Click to expand...



And I was just going to start a profile.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
I was reading through a discussion about why restaurants are having so much trouble finding help right now. And something caught my eye.

There are a lot of people who are against increases in minimum wages that say if they want to make more money they should learn some better skills. The thing is, many of restaurant workers actually had college degrees. A good portion of restaurant and foodservice workers are actually young adults early in their careers with college degrees who are unable to find work at higher paying jobs because the jobs simply aren't available / being created by our economy in the numbers need to hire everyone with the proper skills.

Then Covid-19 hit and we saw a record number of Boomers retire opening up a whole lot of positions that require college degrees and pay more. This is one of the reasons restaurants are having trouble finding help right now. Their pool of potential job applicants has shrunk because many of them have been able to find jobs to put their skills to use and make more money.

Simply put, restaurant / food service jobs don't pay enough to attract workers. If the workers have skills and jobs are available where they can make more money of course the workers are going to choose the jobs where they can make more money.

A former restaurant manager chimed into the discussion and said that restaurants can afford to pay their staff a lot more without having to raise prices or go out of business. They have huge profit margins. The issue is they are greedy and don't want to decrease their profit margins. They are always looking for ways to grow their profit margins. Most restaurant where business is good could afford to pay staff $20 an hour + tips and still turn a higher profit margin than they did in the 70s and 80s. But over the last 40 years the minimum wage for restaurant workers has barely raised compared to menu prices and profits. But asking corporations or owners to to cut back the profit margin they are banking on is sacrilegious. For most it's out of the question and never going to happen. The'll blame that 50¢ increase in minimum wage for inflation and pass on the buck to the consumer.

In no way is it true that raising minimum wage will put restaurants out of business unless the business itself is already on the brink of going out of business. In which case the issue isn't wage increases. It's that either the business is not being run properly or in it's current format can't attract business.
Click to expand...
I agree with @waruv, I've been a waitress before and it's awful. The work is terrible, the hours suck and it's a dead end job.

However, there was a study that came out from CA that suggested that line cooks ended up dying at the highest rates from Covid. Most of it can be traced back to poor ventilation where they were cooking. Restaurant owners haven't completely changed their ventilation systems, and they won't as long as there is a debate of particle vs. aerosol spread even though all the data suggests that this is aerosol spread (which means ventilation should be addressed). So besides the wait staff who are bailing out of a dead end job, there was also a lot of sickness and death with line cooks. I don't care who you are, cooking in a restaurant like this is a skill (even though we call it unskilled work), and it's not something that people are eager to do. The few people that can and would do the job found out that the job got them sick, and I'm sure many decided not to return to a kitchen, or if they did, they went for a job with a higher wage and safer ventilation.

TenderLovingKiller® said:
Yeah, I am a fan of empathy. It’s takes much more strength to show genuine caring than to act like a bully.
Click to expand...
A yoga sutra to increase joy: “By cultivating attitudes of friendliness toward the happy, compassion for the unhappy, delight in the virtuous, and disregard toward the wicked, the mind stuff retains its undisturbed calmness.” — Sri Swami Satchidananda

RenegadeMonster said:
The Fed today announced plans to start winding down covid stimulus.



0% interests rates are likely to end by the end of the year as well.
Click to expand...
The Fed has had a policy coming into the 2000's that the best way to control financial markets is to keep interest rates so they never go above 2%. This 2% hold is a short term fix to a long term problem (and it's probably making the problem worse). Our parents were/are deathly afraid of inflation, which is why they thought it would be great to suppress wages down in order to keep inflation down. The problem with this approach is that when you don't have a barrier for people to borrow against, borrowing becomes easy and cheap, and thus, we get asset price rise. So all the houses kept rising in price because money was/is easy to borrow. No one thought of future debt implications, because population debt and the impact it has on a society is not only absent in our current economic models, but it has never really been considered as a barrier to economic growth. Only now are economists struggling to fit debt into models now that a significant portion of young Americans put off a lot of economic milestones due to increasing debt. And now that terms like "living wage" are entering our lexicon, most people are realizing that suppression of wages only helped to decimate the middle class, instead of making it easier for them to afford a home. At this point, the only people taking advantage of low interest are people with money anyway--so raising the interest rates, while it might freak the markets out--is just highlighting that our economy doesn't work for a majority of the people participating in this economy.
 
Dtknuckles said:
Rather than start a fight with a conservative person over the terrorism in Afghanistan by posting this song, I’m gonna post it here

Click to expand...

My father and I never talked about his time in Vietnam -- all the stories I have about him in the war are from my mother and even those are scant on details and leave you to ask more questions ("everyone got stoned except him and his friend who were on guard duty and that was the night the Tet offensive happened and everyone died except the handful that weren't messed up on drugs") -- but it was obviously a thing that indelibly changed him as a young man, in a way that echoed even into his old age.

I played Alice In Chains' "Rooster" -- a song explicitly about a kid's dad going to Vietnam -- and he mocked it mercilessly ("they're gonna kill the rooster?! gimme a fuckin' break!"). It was a rare moment when he let his guard down about his time in the military, e.g.: when I was a high school senior and the army recruiter called and he tore into the dude and told him he'd break my fingers before letting me enlist and if you call again I Am Going To Find You and We Are Going To Have A Talk You Sonofabitch quote unquote. Until then he'd been noncommitally positive-ish about his time in the military. Then I got an earful until I explained that the recruiters call all the boys in public schools who turn 18, no dad, really I didn't try to sign up.

I played him "And the band played waltzing Matilda" once, in his office. I'd left my guitar in there by accident and wound up fucking around on his computer while he did some of his work and it struck me to do it. We talked about anzac day and gallipoli. We still didn't talk about vietnam but he did say he liked the song. It kills me how much the American right falls over itself with faux hero-worship for the military and in all practical matters, treat them like so much cannon fodder.
 
The Texas anti abortion law that allows private citizens to sue providers of abortions or anyone who assists in helping someone get an abortion such as a family member goes into effect tomorrow.

The current state of the law is that it is upheld until there is SCOTUS intervention. This mean while the legal battles continues that lawsuits can be filed starting tomorrow. And anti abortion groups are prepared to immundate abortion providers with lawsuits starting tomorrow.

With a penalty of $10,000 or more per abortion most providers in Texas will likely stop providing abortions while this plays out. This will require people to go out of state to get an abortion, which makes it harder for people to manage. Not to mention if a family member helps them out, such as gives them cash for the trip or drives them they could be subject to the lawsuit for providing assistance.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
My comment replying to @TenderLovingKiller® was too long to fit into the comments of @GritNGlitter 's profile post today:

I haven't stayed on top of this Texas development but my first question is, how does the third party become aware that an abortion has taken place if the doctor and the patient maintain confidentiality? Is it a thing where there is some sort of general metrics reporting so that they know the doc has performed "an" abortion without knowing on whom it was performed? And if you don't know who the patient was, then can you even claim/prove damages? How is this supposed to work, in their minds?
Click to expand...

The father or parents would most often know. Or friends. Gossips and busybodies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top