wonderingwanderer

Exactly, that’s why I say the US economy is built on vapor

Fair.

People ironically promoting toxic masculinity by perpetuating the stigma that a man needs to get laid in order to be respectable and have self-worth.

What in this post indicates that?

That’s kind of an insane conclusion to draw from this, honestly. Do you think any guy who can’t get laid is a redpilled denizen of the manosphere?

Dude, I’m not a zionist. My comment clearly included critiques of the Israeli government, which a zionist wouldn’t have included. Unlike you, I’m actually capable of criticizing both hamas and the Israeli government. There’s not really a “good side” in this conflict, which is part of why it’s so complex and hard to solve. But there are innocent civilians on both sides.

This is precisely what I meant when I said that to some people, “anyone who doesn’t blow hamas is a genocide supporter.” Your response was to push me to mention what’s wrong with hamas, and then you act like I’m defending Israel because I say “rape and human shields are bad.”

Nothing has been debunked, there’s graphic evidence to the contrary. The “that’s been debunked” bullshit is pro-hamas propaganda.

And you literally said you support hamas unconditionally. Now you say “I didn’t say I don’t have criticisms of hamas, I do.” Do you know what unconditional means, or are you backtracking?

And if anything I said sounds to you like Israeli propaganda, it’s because I was pointing out to you the logical conclusions of the things you were saying. You claimed that pro-Palestinian and pro-hamas are the same thing. That’s literally Israeli propaganda. Israel defines every Palestinian civilian as a member of hamas, to try to justify their atrocities against civilians.

Apparently you misunderstood what I was saying, although I thought I was quite clear. I wasn’t saying “Israel is right, every Palestinian is hamas so it’s okay to target civilians.” I was saying “conflating pro-Palestinian with pro-hamas is Israeli propaganda, which you’re parroting, and if it were true then we would have to accept Israel’s justifications for atrocities against civilians.” Real self-aware wolves moment there.

But it seems your head is so deep in your own ass that it can likely never be extricated, so you’ll probably double down on calling me a zionist because I refuse to say hamas is even remotely okay. Apparently according to you, I can’t be pro-civilian, supporting Palestinian civilians and Israeli civilians alike. Apparently, according to you, I have to choose a side, and only one can survive. That logic leaves room for only two outcomes, both of which are ethnic cleansing on one side or the other, and creates a “survival of the fittest”/“might makes right” paradigm which is unwinnable for Palestine. And for the record, in case it’s still unclear, I fundamentally disagree with that.

Woop, there it is. You can’t rape your way to liberty. But since you support hamas unconditionally, I suppose you disagree with me there.

I would say I support Palestinian liberation, but if you think that means I have to support hamas then I guess I can’t do that. That’s what I mean when I say you’re promoting Israel’s narrative when you say pro-Palestinian means pro-Hamas. If that’s the case, then I guess they weren’t lying when they designated hospitals and schools as military targets. In your own words, those are run by hamas.

If it were up to me, I’d say avoid civilian infrastructure. But if hamas is hiding weapons caches and command centers underneath hospitals and schools, then they’re partially responsible for the resulting destruction.

The Palestinian Authority could have made diplomatic progress towards autonomy and sovereignty, but hamas fought them for control and radicalized the youth. Now the Palestinian Authority has no power, and terrorists are indistinguishable from civilians.

But you’re not willing to criticize hamas, so you’re just gonna pout and accuse me of supporting genocide. I don’t. Israel’s response has been disproportionate beyond any reasonability. But you’re enabling their narrative when you say things like “picking and choosing which [Palestinian factions] you do or don’t support is completely ridiculous.”

I can and do reject hamas for their ideologies as well as their methodologies. That doesn’t mean I approve of Israel’s ethnic cleansing, expansion, and settler-colonialism. But when you conflate the two, you’re actually helping Israel because now anyone who doesn’t support hamas can’t support Palestine, apparently, according to you.

If you can’t recognize the difference between being pro-palestinian and pro-hamas, then you’re not worth having a serious discussion with.

By the way, the Israeli government would like nothing more than for the world to view the two things as the same. It’s the same as conflating anti-zionism with anti-semitism.

And if you think it’s not a real problem and only exists in the imagination, then you should read more about some of the “activist” groups in the UK.

You don’t have to blow hamas in order to take an anti-colonial stance, and if you think otherwise then you’re proving my point.

What hardware is manufactured in the US that can’t be sources elsewhere?

That’s what I meant by IOU. The treasury gives them the money, they return the bond, and it goes in the shredder. Of course it happens electronically these days, but before the internet there was a physical sheet of paper that was exchanged.

So instead of renewing/rolling over the bonds, countries can decide to collect the money owed and the US treasury can’t say no.

If they’re selling on the secondary market before the time is up, yes that’s different. But if everyone decides to sell then supply outpaces demand and the value drops. Then nobody buys new bonds from the US and they still can’t borrow, and have to default on their loans.

If the US refuses to honor its treasury bonds, then the promise to repay them means nothing and they lose their value. That would be a different way of crashing the US economy.

No one would let them borrow money anymore, meaning they would no longer be able to afford to pay the interest on the debt they’ve already accumulated.

A treasury bond is basically an IOU: the treasury is legally bound to buy it back.

In my view, that can only be mitigated by detangling other economies from the US. Selling off treasury bonds is one step. Increasing tech/data sovereignty is another, as well as shifting reliance to more local supply chains and manufacturing. And moving assets to the European market (in Europe’s case).

Any steps to boost sovereignty and independence help to reduce reliance on the US, and mitigate the impact of a US economic crash. The lesson learned from 08 should be not to depend too heavily on US bubble economies.

Besides, the US hardly manufactures anything. They export corn, soybeans, petroleum, and cloud-based software. And US treasury bonds, whose only value is that people agree that they hold value. What happens when people suddenly realize or decide that they don’t?

Grains and legumes can be ground elsewhere; arguably better. Countries already are and must continue to reduce their dependencies on fossil fuels; petroleum will not be a major commodity for much longer, no matter how the industry kicks and screams and colludes with the US government for corrupt advantage. Lastly, the shift to tech and data sovereignty must happen anyway, and is happening. The sooner other nations get their data off US-based cloud infrastructure, the better off they’ll be.

There’s no downside, other than reducing one’s dependency too slowly and being among the last to jump ship before it sinks.

That’s how it could create a runaway snowball effect. The first few countries to sell off their US bonds would be in the best position, after that the bonds’ value starts to dip. Other countries see that and decide to sell off now before it gets worse, and the value dips further, accelerating as more and more countries realize they need to dump their US bonds asap cause it’s only going to keep plummeting. The last ones to notice or act on it will be stuck with worthless bonds that will never recover their value.

That’s how it would result in total economic collapse for america, and knowing that the sooner you drop the hot potato the better is what will create the rush to sell them off as soon as possible. How many initial sell-offs it would take to precipitate this effect is the question.

And since the crashed dollar will lower the purchasing power of anyone whose wealth or income is primarily in US dollars, anyone who drops these assets ahead of the game will be in the best shape. That’s why a lot of US banks are currently buying gold; it’s very likely to hold its value and is a very stable asset.

Assuming countries drop their USD-based assets before the crash, the relative values of their currencies should remain similar. For instance, the EUR to GBP conversion rate wouldn’t change much. The more heavily invested in USD a nation’s economy, the more detrimental the impact would be on their currency.

Commodity prices measured in USD for example would skyrocket, because the relative value of the USD would be crashing, but any currency that untethers from the US economy in time should remain stable relative to commodity prices, or possibly see some advantage if it gains value as a result of the USD crashing.

This is all contingent on countries dropping their US bonds and other assets, of course. The more dependent their wealth is on the US economy, the more detrimental the USD crash-out will be to that country and its currency. All the more incentive to be among the first to drop their US assets.

Even if they decide collectively not to do this, the AI bubble is going to burst sooner or later, and the further they kick the can down the road the worse the crash is going to be. Along with other trends like the US reversal of green energy initiatives while the fossil fuel industry is beginning to show cracks, the impending collapse of oil prices, etc., investing in USD is just really bad fiscal policy. People are only still doing it because they believe they can hold the jenga tower up long enough to grow their portfolios just a little more. Their greed will kick them in the ass if they hedge their bets too far…

Anyone who doesn’t blow hamas at every chance they get is supporting genocide, according to some people.

The dude’s username has “stalin” in it, I don’t think they’re capable of formulating a good faith argument.

Instead you must phrase it as “only a loser would ever ______” or “the democrats really want you to ______”

Free lube

Just don’t rip it out like you’re starting a lawnmower, should be simple

Not even a little bit

Nice business model. Silicone ice molds, sanitary and there’s no risk of tearing during extraction.

I think you’re taking the shitposting too seriously.