HN user

vtashkov

-10 karma
Posts3
Comments23
View on HN

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-watches-of-president-b...

"Now we're talking ubiquity. When President Biden isn't wearing one of his many steel (or two-tone) sport watches, you'll likely find him with an Apple Watch. It's unclear why, or for which occasions he chooses the smartwatch out of his watch box, but he's worn it in the Oval, and at the Resolute, just as he has with any of his other watches. "

So when Biden wears it, it's OK. No 'former CIA' writes any open letters, no HN Commies "following orders". When the Vice-President wears it - they are stupid and they are threatening national security.

What a hypocrisy is the whole democratic party. Disgusting propaganda methods akin to Soviets.

How is that not totalitarian propaganda? What is the difference between USSR official propaganda and Democrat "aid for other countries"? I am interested in HN Leftist crowd opinion. Or maybe they will downvote this to oblivion, because it's easier. But easier doesn't mean 'right'.

Last week it was still the job of the previous administration to publish it and it was the last administration which created the problem in the first place. Ideological purification was also what the previous administration has done quite a lot by hiring people based on their sexual preference, skin colour, gender and other irrelevant to the job characteristics.

If the government owns all it is FAR worse. Intel used to be a monopoly in practice. Now it’s not. The manufacturer of CPUs in USSR though never ceased to be the one and only. Is it dumbed enough for you to understand?

1) wealth is not increased by tax break, only current income is increased

2) if government gives everyone tax break but not me, it means only that the government taxes only me

3) if everyone has 50% more money, there is very high probability that my business will go up A LOT

Seriously, dude, it’s not worthy anymore to try and explain to you very basic stuff. Inflation is not a balance between taxation and spending. All Middle Eastern countries are having huge spending and almost zero taxes. I asked you very simple question and you couldn’t answer.

What bothers me most is why people write about things they have no clue about and clearly haven’t even put a decent thought into it.

Basically what you believe in is that the thieves are controlling the inflation because they get some of the citizens wealth.

So, in this desert there would be no inflation or deflation, you say. Let’s say we use gold coins there. Wouldn’t we have an inflation if we find a gold mine there and everybody start digging up gold? You are missing the fact that the money printing is not driven only by government spending. It is driven primarily by the monetary policy (in the hands of the FED) and to some extent by the government debt. You have knowledge gaps on a very basic level. The idea that taxation stops inflation is absolutely ridiculous. It would mean that countries with low taxes have very high inflation and this is not the case. It would also means that the inflation should be constant and in struct correlation with the taxes. Both statements are completely false and very easily provable by quick fact check. The only things taxes do are: misplacing capital and stopping economic growth, which may be the same thing arguably

That is a big assumption. Tax money need not be a constant. But for the sake of following the same logic: if companies pay bigger taxes, they also have to make up the shortfall. Actually, this last one is much more accurate statement. Companies do not pay taxes, PEOPLE pay taxes. So taxes are paid either by the employees, the clients or by the owners (which in case of the big tech are generally common people). With high taxation you are hurting: the customers, the workers and the middle class saving for their retirement. Who is winning the tax money: state bureaucracy, corrupt politicians and the business around them, people who live like parasites (or rather are forced to live like that, because they are electoral power).

For even longer time we have a REAL proof (not mathematical wordplay) that whenever, without exception, someone takes a swing at free markets it leads to people dying. IT has always been a disaster and people always have been exiting those societies where that happens towards more free societies. You yourself have plenty of options to go somewhere with less free market - Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Russia, even China. Have YOU emigrated to such a country?

I agree 100% with you and that's partially the reason I posted here. It is not only a rant, but also a genuine question what people think about Google Ads in the end of 2024. In other words: it is an attempt to validate (or reject) my gut reaction through externalizing the question.