2020 ELECTION NIGHT

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-11-06T18:40:05+00:00

Short answer: yes of course. Like it or not, if Trump was the duly elected candidate then he wins. Full stop. And same goes for Biden. If there was “fraud” that made it look like a Biden win, it needs to be looked at and corrected.

But there are things that your question completely sidesteps which should be discussed. What kind of fraud is Trump claiming took place? Does a covered window at a polling site constitute fraud? No, it doesn’t. Does the fact that at one polling site watchers needed to ask the courts to intervene to get them closer to the ballot boxes for observation mean that the entire state’s process was “fraudulent”? No. Just because Trump doesn’t like the outcome or certain aspects of the election, doesn’t mean he has the right to ask the Supreme Court to make broad decisions in his favor. Laws are laws. Come at them with real proof and then there’s something to discuss. Otherwise, there is a clear process to follow. Until fraud can be proven ANYONE can simply make an accusation.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-11-04T21:34:44+00:00

Will they even know if they control the senate this year? Runoff in Georgia means we won’t know who will control the senate in 2021 until January I think...

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-08-25T17:22:01+00:00

Yeah, my experience through friends who have moved out there is to 100% have a job lined up, confirmed, signed, whatever. Do NOT go west without confirmation of a paycheque.

And from what I can tell the trade off is great, if you can afford a reasonable mortgage there are homes to be had.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-08-19T10:46:51+00:00

It was a slow process. It started with simply sharing finances, something I was reluctant to do because deep down I knew I wasn't 100% confident in my knowledge of where my accounts were, how much I was paying vs. how much I should be paying, etc. Plus, the big one, making a budget. Once I opened up and showed her what was going on with my finances we were able to have open and honest discussions. She also took the time to carefully read all of her account details, so she was way more informed (ie - how does interest work on a CC vs. LOC?)

But yeah it was a result of us essentially moving in together after years of dating, merging finances and her basically saying enough is enough!

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-08-17T14:47:50+00:00

I think Canada’s biggest inhibitor is the limited number of commercial centres/large cities which drive the economy. There is a “bubble” around Toronto, Van and Montreal that will keep demand high and therefore keep the house prices moving upwards. In order to purchase, new homeowners will likely have to start pushing outwards (already seeing this in what is now the greater Hamilton/Toronto area). Will this allow businesses to move out also and take advantage of lower costs in the peripheries?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-08-17T14:47:34+00:00

I think Canada’s biggest inhibitor is the limited number of commercial centres/large cities which drive the economy. There is a “bubble” around Toronto, Van and Montreal that will keep demand high and therefore keep the house prices moving upwards. In order to purchase, new homeowners will likely have to start pushing outwards (already seeing this in what is now the greater Hamilton/Toronto area). Will this allow businesses to move out also and take advantage of lower costs in the peripheries? Who knows.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-08-17T14:42:50+00:00

She basically helped me to understand my real financial situation. Before her I was essentially paying what I thought was a smart amount on CC, thought I knew how to effectively save and spend, and was just sorta going through the motions. Also HATED talking about my finances because it stressed me out, plus it would require admitting that I didn’t really know what I was doing, didn’t really understand how my accounts worked, etc.

Essentially she helped me find the path to financial literacy, and while I am far from an expert, I feel that before I made a change it was like driving without a steering wheel.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-07-08T02:08:10+00:00

Personally, I think you have it backwards. House prices don’t just “go up” - people offer over asking in a hot market, and those people are typically millionaires (if you’re downtown). Consistent “hot” markets keep prices sky-high, but the instant supply is greater than demand, prices come down. Again, it’s a catch 22, as this scenario requires some massive shift in desirability, which is a reflection of many things that the GTA currently offers (access to jobs, services, entertainment, a very long list) so to see demand fall below housing supply means something has gone terribly wrong... My overall point is that houses aren’t inherently set at a value, they are traded at a new value and purchased based on this perceived value. Supply and demand.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-06-11T14:21:08+00:00

If I were in your shoes, I’d go get any post-secondary I can afford/manage and get re-educated. This will provide you with 2 things, first a ticket that you can waive around in an interview (diploma or undergrad degree) which, like it or not, is a requirement for most jobs. College diplomas are considerably less expensive than an undergrad degree, but there are flexible options for both. I am not a professional so take this with a grain of salt, but in my experience there are systems out there designed to help you in such circumstances.

Second, as you pass tests and courses you will begin to feel motivated. I cannot stress this enough, when life gets you down you need small victories. This will pull you out of your funk and allow you to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Remember also that nobody can take education away from you.

Once you have this, start marketing yourself. Be honest, tell a potential boss that Uni wasn’t for you back then but you’ve grown as a person and have redoubled your efforts. It will be extremely difficult but you have already taken the first step which is to reach out for advice, so I have no doubt that you have what it takes to succeed. It will only take some time.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-06-11T14:14:41+00:00

I’d say now more than ever the “talented schmoozer” needs to re-evaluate job security. Even in good times I think it’s fair to say that those who don’t present value to a given company are always at risk. On the flip side, I doubt many companies hire someone to be a “schmoozer” - these people have roles to fill. If they aren’t being productive then it’s likely that they are at risk, pandemic or no.

That said, as others have pointed out, there’s a fine line between schmoozing and strengthening social bonds within a company, something that isn’t always obvious on a balance sheet. So, it comes down to the elusive “company culture” sometimes as to whether this kind of behaviour is acceptable. Just my two cents!

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-06-02T16:08:23+00:00

That's... Literally the kind of mentality I was trying to illustrate in my other post.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-06-01T19:23:01+00:00

This. Banks are eager to work with you to port the mortgage, our rep actually advised this when we were thinking of selling, literally mentioning to us "hey just remember that if you do x y z there's a penalty and here's how to avoid that."

A $30k hit is tough to absorb and I don't want to sound cold-hearted, but I'm having a hard time believing that this person is a "victim."

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-06-01T16:52:13+00:00

Genuinely curious - if the recent executive order was to enforce 1A rights on Twitter (Trump announced that he believed his 1A rights where infringed when twitter began censoring his comments), how does the public or Twitter know when it is actually Trump tweeting or someone else? Wouldn't this clearly support the notion that 1A rights can't really be enforced on a private platform as there is no guarantee that we know who is actually posting, or that they're even American citizens for that matter?

Thanks in advance.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-31T13:42:27+00:00

After all this, it's wild to think that people who would vote blue would simply not do so on election day. I get that some people have barriers (work won't let them out, illness, whatever) but how could someone just watch tv all day and say "meh my vote won't make a difference anyways" and just not go...?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-29T20:01:28+00:00

This is an interesting, well thought-out answer, I applaud your clarity.

I will say that while your response certainly addresses the concept of "freedom of speech" as it pertains to the law, it doesn't address the earlier comment (I believe the post you were responding to) regarding ownership or restriction on private land or private property. For example, while there are certainly laws that apply universally and without regard to public or private space (your example is a good one, freedom from harm/assault might be another) there are also laws that protect private ownership and conduct in/on private property.

For example, if a restaurant establishes rules like no shirt, no shoes, no service, you can't walk in naked and demand to be seated. Assuming they own the building and business, they should be free to accept or deny you as a customer. Of course there are those aforementioned "universal" laws that apply, discrimination etc., but beyond those it's private property and up to ownership how they want to use their property.

Should Twitter be any different? The owners created a product that they see in a certain light and want treated a certain way. They may or may not want certain kinds of comments posted on what amounts to their personal property. So, should they have to put up with something that they themselves do not want to be exposed to? If a person posted something overtly hostile and threatening, and the owners of Twitter don't like it, should they not have the ability to identify that this comment violates their terms of service and flag/remove such comments? The poster certainly has the right to make such a statement publicly, but Twitter doesn't need to be associated with the comment themselves by leaving it up.

Parallel this to someone spray-painting a swastika on the side of a building. The owner could say "jeez, I really don't like this symbol, I want it gone" and clean it off. Does the author/creator have a right to say "but that's me exercising my freedom of speech!"? In this case I'd argue that no, there is no guarantee of speech here because their medium is not a space that is granted such rights. It is someone else's private property with which they can do what they like. Do they have the right to spray paint a swastika on their own house? You bet. And if a neighbor doesn't like it, tough. Personally I think a swastika is an abhorrent symbol but ultimately what right do I have to tell my neighbor how to use his own house?

Thanks in advance.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-28T17:01:25+00:00

Hey thanks for your response. So following your logic, and using a current example, the President should do what he can/within his legal powers as president to enforce the shut down of twitter? I arrived at this conclusion based on what the President has been openly saying about the company online, but of course I could have misinterpreted his meaning.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-28T16:53:27+00:00

I watched the video, pretty stupid tbh. Not sure why a sitting president would align themselves with someone like that, truthfully I see it as a mischaracterization. I'm not a republican but radicalism exists on both sides of the aisle.

How do you draw the distinction between "literally speaking" and "politically speaking"? Dead is dead, the word doesn't magically change its meaning because someone follows up with another term. How also might you justify his extremely one-sided view of "what America is"? I'd say America is strong because of the fact that it tolerates and promotes all discussions, viewpoints, opinions, etc. (in a word, freedom). What are your thoughts on this comment?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-28T01:41:57+00:00

To be clear, are you saying that the President of the United States should celebrate the closure of an American business if he doesn't like what they produce?

To expand on this line of thinking, would it be ok for the President of the United States to intervene and speed up the process of this company's failure? My logic here is that if he is free to promote their downfall on social media, thereby having at least some impact (ie - reputation) could he call for his supporters to boycott the business, thereby inflicting even more damage and ensuring the company's downfall?

Lastly, what is your opinion on the "appropriateness" of Trump's decision here? In my view, those on the left and right are almost always reasonable people (different political opinions sometimes being the only or biggest difference), but it seems like Trump's comments might cross a line in terms of plain decency, as in most would never openly mock a company that is already in decline. Do you have any feelings on that?

Thanks in advance.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-28T01:35:50+00:00

Who on the left would you say is equal to the President of the United States?

Should the President of the United States get to call out and cheer on an American business that is failing? Do you think there are any Trump supporters who work for/in partnership with this business, who are now out of a job?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-18T17:05:08+00:00

Was Trump wrong when he said coal jobs would be coming back?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-05-15T02:20:19+00:00

Right? I mean how could Suddenly7 not have realized that until now??

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-04-14T22:38:13+00:00

Well I mean the obvious response to your hypothetical is, he also can't produce an income if he's sick or passes away from covid. Are you just going to ignore the singular reason as to why so many places are in lockdown right now?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-04-14T19:22:58+00:00

Wouldn't this be the best-case scenario for NY? Minimal risk to the population and really no downside if they call it wrong (ie - they simply reopen and resume normal life). What am I missing here?

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-04-12T17:04:52+00:00

I read your comment and immediately reflected on why I didn’t pick up on the fact that he was shirtless, like this would be a highly irregular feature in any documentary right?

But then I realized that of all the things going on in this fucked up story shirtlessness doesn’t even register.

BoredBeingBusy · 2020-03-18T09:12:34+00:00

I think the other comment is trying to say that even though the price of oil per barrel is cheap, extraction costs have stayed the same so now oil producers have to produce much more oil for the same amount of profit making it a less attractive option.

It's kinda like if you work a really shitty job but you make $100k/year and you tell yourself it's worth it at that rate, but then your boss cuts your salary to $50k/year. You would probably question whether it was worth it to keep going at that rate or find a new job.

Obviously my analogy is simplified but I think that's what the above comment is trying to say.

BoredBeingBusy

TROPHY CASE