leh-nerd skin-erd

Round-Dude, you sent a tweet that sung the praises of Barrack moving away from a Not In My Backyard mentality. I asked about backyards of the people making the statements, and you're saying I'm not making sense? I was unfamiliar with the phrase "Euclidean Zoning" and did a quick check of the web. I can see how it meshes with your pod city goal and the movement away from safe home spaces in suburbs and towns across the country. It also leads me back to the NIMBY question earlier--who challenges the local regulations to increase density for the greater good--Barrack, Biden or Harris? Thanks for the reference on the zoning. I'll read up on that.

The most recent foray into NIMBYism on a national, political level involved immigrants being removed from Martha’s Vineyard. I haven’t read any accounts of Barrack and Michelle offering up some of the land at their disposal but it’s possible. Barrack and Michelle own multiple residences, JB owns oceanfront property and a personal residence in Delaware, and according to one article, Harris has several properties in places like San Francisco, Brentwood and DC. Who would you anticipate partners with the government first, cedes/sells some land for a couple of those high rise Lego condos you believe are the future?

So the government passes excessive legislation that causes massive red tape in the housing market, leading to a shortage of housing and difficulties for builders of said homes, but you’re hoping the excessive regulation people will eliminate the regulations they came up with to begin with? Interesting.

I think you're reinventing the run up to the Harris coronation. Let's not pretend that Biden (and Trump) were not fossils in 2019-2020 as well, and there were lots of younger options including Harris (who was really ungoshly unpopular for a non-fossil) to carry the torch. You didn't vote for a 45 year old Biden sharp of mind and wit, you voted for a 78 year old man with pretty obvious signs of old age and did so convincingly. Age wasn't the problem, it was mental capacity and increasingly questionable comments, behavior and judgement. Absent an historically bad (yet completely predictable) performance in July, you all line up again completely convinced by those doing the convincing. Yes, of course he was boxed out because those that seek to convince read the tea leaves, but that wasn't the point of the conversation about Biden and why he tapped out. He tapped out because he was forced to, and what's interesting to me (science experiment interesting) is that in spite of the knowledge that the architects of the party clearly knew he was shot, they had you lining up anyways. They do again. No, thank you, but thanks for writing.

We had a nice moment earlier. You were empathetic about my limitations as you viewed them. I acknowledged your feelings and expressed appreciation that you cared enough to care enough. Most importantly we agree that Biden was convinced to discontinue his run in spite of repeated declarations of his intentions before a debate was scheduled, in the run up to and after the debate. His approach can best be described as “Anytime, Anywhere Pal!”. Now it seems you’re intent on reverse engineering what happened to fit the narrative of an heroic statesman facing a silent crisis of confidence walking away, and the courageous constituency who knew on some level that while he had lost a step, it was really his age that was of concern, not his penchant for using words that don’t exist and talking to dead associates that was a bigger issue than how many birthdays he has had. After consultations with doctors, staff, leadership, family (and a host of enablers on a massive scale), he decided to run. When he struggled, he continued to run. When he crashed like the Hindenburg in the Trump debate, he continued to run. In the week or so after his epic implosion, he continued to declared he was THE man. We don’t know this because I say so, we know this from the words he used and thoughts shared by his advisory team. All the rest is drivel. He was convinced to drop out, he dropped out and that’s about it. As to why, speculation abounds.

Obviously, board members here have a tendency to disagree on just about everything. JB decision to discontinue his run as some sort of noble gesture for party flies in direct contrast to his actions, his words, and his declaration of his intentions. He quite literally spent hours preparing for a nationally televised debate to showcase his grit and competence, shook apart at the seams and suggested he had a cold...bad prep...he was traveling too much..and he was just tired. He declared after the debate that he was staying in the race and would beat DJT, I guess having recovered from the flu-that he picked up in on an international flight-and impacted debate prep and which subsequently left him exhausted and caused him to confuse medicare with the Japanese in 45.

I appreciate your expression of sympathy, compassion is sadly lacking in the world today. We agree that in spite of his repeated declarations that he was running, he was convinced to stand down.

Ah, the Secretly Hoping Society. They were pretty certain that Trump was the only president holding classified documents as I recall, then suddenly became experts on slippage which later morphed into special consideration for electeds. Nice people, a bit naive. It’s entirely possible JB was reading the Secretly Hoping newsletter, where all the Secret Hopers were urging him to rethink his decision. Not probable but possible. But if you prefer the Biden was saying he was running but what he was really saying was he wasn’t running angle, cool. At the end of day, it seems quite clear he was forced to tap out, and there typically is a reason for that sort of thing. Sometimes a velvet glove is used, other times the hammer comes down.

That is a funny interpretation to be sure. As to mature ladies and facial considerations, I believe you’re looking for a different website.

That’s silly. Biden’s family is a mess, his daughter-in-law getting a pass on her misdeeds, his daughter reminisced about some of her odd memories with her dad from childhood, and it’s quite likely Hunter is guilty of much more than we’re hearing about. It seems increasingly likely Biden used his office for financial gain, it is a reasonable assumption that his brother could be targeted for misdeeds in the family business, and Biden is a shell of whatever man he was a decade or two ago. He also left classified document strewn all over the place, which implies he’s a pretty sloppy guy. All it would really take is a threat to his legacy and family. He was rock solid he was running until suddenly, he wasn’t.

I'm not a teetotaler, but find myself drinking less and less as I get older. The world involving anything called anything like "Grand Cru" is completely lost on me. I have a friend who owns a nice liquor store and when we get together, he's always bringing something for the rest of the group to enjoy. Sadly, it's all wasted on me.

Oh, gotcha. My biggest issue is the erections of fences and physical barriers to ordinary, average citizens as they go about their lives. It's truly weird that in sanctuary cities and states, for people consistently fine with open borders, that any barrier might be installed beyond a lock on the front door and in extreme situations, some common sense extra security. It does have a tendency to lead to conspiracy theories though.

You have the money, share it!

It wasn't just the kid walking around, though. It was the losing track of him, allowing him on the roof of the building where law enforcement was perched to look for potential shooters, allowing him to set up, fire multiple rounds, kill a man protecting his family, injure two others and nearly kill a candidate for President.

Wait until she starts price controlling all that grape juice so the masses can get a swig. Next thing you know we'll find you nippling up to the wine in a box game.

You insist of reviewing medical records as some sort of purity test for teetotalers? What's with you, Johnny Law?

No, Starr, I don't want any of that. Sensible regulation and sensible consumer protections are good for everyone. You're preaching to the choir on all that, but it doesn't strike you as odd at all that these things continue to happen given the size and scope of our federal and state government? Here's what happens imo: Rules implemented Rules ignored Big dogs skip the penalty phase Regulators who missed it continue to regulate Someone screams "bailing out huge corps and stock broker bonuses!" and the regulators who didn't do a great job regulating implement sweeping changes that impact honest players (and there are many) and consumers adversely 5, 6, 8, 10 years down the road the same thing happens Btw, government chooses winners/losers all the time, year in year out in ways a private corporation could only hope to do. I'll point out here that I suggested balance was the key, and you immediately responded with some silliness about 5 year olds living rent free. I started saving for my future in 1984...slow, steady, consistent...paid my rent every time it was due, paid my mortgages when the time was right, paid my bills upon receipt, and solved the problems I occasionally created by figuring out a solution. I have been lucky, worked hard, paid attention, learned, grown, and completely accept the fact that balance between private industry and regulation is absolutely necessary. Kudos to you though on your Che Guevera rant for not using the term "FAT CATS!". Sure, but along the way, decisions are made and people benefit in ways the private sector would kill for. My life got a lot simpler when I started thinking of government in same terms as that of corporate America. There are winners and losers there, too. Social Security is a fiscal mess. Medicare is a fiscal mess. These facts are not in dispute. Goodness. I can only imagine the gaskets blown if you had an idea of whatever it is you are referring to meant. On the other hand, it does seem you kind of understood what I meant because you said this "....private business does need the government..."---of course it does! Let's agree on that.

Sure, we can talk about that. Though, shouldn’t we also discuss the political class that established rules/regulations that came up with the safeguards to prevent the incidents from 29, the 80s, 2008, SV bank in 23, and crypto? How did that go? Let’s remember, too that the big government crowd gives us an estimated $5 trillion in revenue and it’s not enough, not nearly ever enough. How is it going with Medicare? Social Security? The budget? Government needs private industry and private industry needs governance, but let’s not pretend these things happen in a vacuum.

That’s fair.

Inflation is right sized now, I think. Plus it wasn’t the admins fault, though she’ll address it straight up like a boss, but if she doesn’t, it’s the economy stupid. (I don’t really think you’re stupid).

Ah, thanks for the explanation. I was wondering about the middle class thing, but wasn’t quite certain how someone might qualify for a new home buyer credit if they weren’t first time home buyers regardless of income. I think either way, “need” is often relative to who benefits. Much ado is made about “fair share” and income tax, where someone who makes X is somehow beating the system when the tax paid is 30+ % of income. Yeah that was some serious cash. I was paying $450/ per month for my family of 5 and was aggravated every time I paid the bill. Again though, we complain about the cost of services but accept a whopping 13% going to the government, never seeing an opportunity to reduce the tax.

What do you mean by “the middle class…who don’t need it as much.”? As for cell phones, this article from 2023 suggests $74 per month v $60 in the States. Is that after the gouging was addressed? Also, I always wonder what the impact of taxation is on your monthly bill (before or after). Back before we used VoI for our office phones, my bill was around $400 per month, but nearly $90 of that was tax/surcharge/fee.

Liberals seem to like their leadership tied to the Chinese government, I think that’s a net plus on his resume.

I’m not even sure why the article is necessary, or the agent for the Buffalo field office was even quoted. Lots of people pose a “significant threat” to lots of other people, and even if NYS becomes a safe harbor for dangerous criminals, its like “Yeah, ok, there have been like tons of people who’ve killed way more than 23 people”. What a worry wart! Do we really need all this drama being reported? Imagine how hard it is on the Los Killers de Ventanilla y Callao members trying to improve the community, you know, Habitat for Humanity and whatnot.

One of our relatives is from China. Her dad still lives there, mom passed away a year or two ago. She travelled there recently in an attempt to gain access to money she has in her accounts, and had tremendous difficulty even gaining basic access to funds. Her husband was sharing some stories from her life—people simply disappearing after speaking out about issues mundane and complicated.