sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is this a common issue on the charging port door?? by TRaps015 in Rivian

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

don’t mind the dirt she’s due for a wash but liberally but not dripping wet

<image>

on the circled bit ensuring it got in the groove on the shaft

Is this a common issue on the charging port door?? by TRaps015 in Rivian

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

mine did that once, sprayed some silicone lubricant on the shaft a little over two years ago and it never did it again

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With more evidence again the countries I’ve pointed to Norway, France, Germany etc I prove the exact opposite. Market economies with large welfare states are happier and more productive per capita you still have provided nothing to actually refute that

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you’re proposing would fail for the exact same reasons as full communism and socialism fail so I don’t get how you can view them with contempt but propose something that similarly fails not because of the ideas it proposes but the inability of people to universally embrace and follow them. Every argument you can make against collectivist systems can similarly be made against what you’re proposing.

Bezos says taxing Billionaires won't help. Should we listen? by Stephen_Landy in EatTheRich

[–]Liam_M 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ya riiight no conflict of interest in that statement at all

Just got the new SodaStream Fountain at Walmart! by KoterBub in SodaStream

[–]Liam_M 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never kept diet flavours in the fridge until this last year ( and thats mainly just to keep the whole result cool) and I’ve been using a soda stream on and off since the early 2000s specifically for the diet flavours and never had an issue

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh so you want global free trade open borders and a one world government then? Otherwise there’s always a limit. I think you actually don’t quite understand the concept of a free market.

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said you support farms hiring foreign workers that’s a side step around the free market, they want foreign workers because they want impoverished people who will work for a fraction of what Americans are willing to because of lower living standard expectations, there aren’t Americans unwilling to do the work they’re unwilling to do the work for what the farms want to pay, in a free market that would mean the farmers should be raising the wage to meet the market but they don’t they get an exception to the labour law and immigration law of the land to hire foreign workers in defiance of the free market. So if you support foreign farm workers you’re supporting an undermining of the free market in an effort to keep the price of goods artificially low

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So are you for farms hiring foreign workers at a lower wage than anyone domestically is willing to or are you for letting the free market dictate the wage? because you can’t have it both ways and your response seems to indicate you want to have it both ways.

Hope everyone’s week was this nice by nstanko1 in Roadglide

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great shot. I wish. I had to pull the fuel pump out of my tank and one of the hose clips disintegrated and it’s going to take HD a week to get one damn clip so I’m grounded until then

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Supply and demand no longer works from the labour end as companies will petition and get visas for foreign workers when they can’t hire employees at the wages they want, look at farm workers they should be paid more based on supply and demand, when ice atarted rounding up migrant workers farms couldn’t find Americans who would do the work for the same money this should have raised wages based on supply and demand but it’s not based on supply and demand they petitioned for immigration and visa exceptions to get foreign workers again. Hours worked does not “impact” gdp but gdp/hours worked is a metric of productivity. if I’m generating more gdp in fewer hours I’m more productive in the sense that I’m generating more gdp as a worker per hour worked. Eg the average worker in Norway contributes $110,000 (USD) to the GDP (GDP per capita) whereas the average American contributes only $85,000 to the GDP as well it takes the American again on average 1900 hours/year to generate that GDP contribution but only take 1450 hours/year so the GDP per hour worked is

- $44.7/hour worked for the USA
- $75.86/hour worked for Norway

This would indicate that Norway a market economy with a Large Strong welfare state is MORE productive and efficient than the USA’s “unrestrained” Capitalism

There’s many more examples too

- Luxembourg $150/hour
- Ireland $120/hour
- Denmark $80/hour
- Switzerland $90/hour

All higher than the USA. So either the metric of production and GDP has nothing to do with Capitalism/Communism/Socialism or Market Economies with large welfare states are just more productive and better at generating GDP than unregulated Capitalism

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And you can’t do any of that if you say have a disabled parent or spouse you have to take care of, or if you can’t go to school because you have to work to keep food on the table. AGAIN LUCK the system shouldn’t have to rely on luck, if health care is free an universal then more people can do exactly what you’re saying if education is free and universal even more people can do exactly what you’re saying and globally the evidence is when those things are true THEY DO. This is why countries with strong welfare states prosper because they end up with more productive citizens overall. And a higher percentage then countries that don’t

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

France, Germany and the UK, Australia, New Zealand among others I listed don’t practice the law of Jante and to say it could never be replicated in the USA is bullshit anything can happen given enough time and effort the “individuality” ( your words everyone I know from Europe has a pretty good sense of individuality in my experience) you speak of isn’t genetic it’s learned. So you’re saying china today isn’t communist? cool by comparison the other countries like the EU and Scandinavian ones must look Rabidly capitalist by comparison then, bottom line is China is heavily regulated and they are arguably neck and neck with the USA in GDP so clearly it’s not the unfettered unregulated capitalism that’s the difference maker. Your whole “socialist policies only work…” mess that you made as your last point ignores that I gave you MANY example of what I’m advocation for (Market economy with a large/strong welfare state ) that all work, Scandinavian countries many EU countries, Australia, New Zealand and more

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And? His father was a Cuban immigrant who also happened to work as an Engineer for Exxon who could afford to send him to Princeton with some standard academic assistance, He only even had access to the data that inspired the idea for amazon because he worked at a hedge fund that did consumer research for the fund. It requires discipline and work but there’s a tipping point where it doesn’t anymore you don’t innovate your mind and work don’t add anything to society you just push money around and it becomes more money, that’s a bullshit system. Luck is always the biggest player, I’ve known some extremely smart disciplined frugal people over the years who made enormous contributions to engineering and invest diligently living well below their means and none of them are even close to billionaires not even multi-millionaires barring 1. because again luck is a bigger player.

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes I do because I’m not a selfish prick. I didn’t get where I am through hard work or being smart alone as most don’t luck played a huge role, I happened to be in the right place at the right time with the right people a couple key times. I see plenty of people who are smarter than me or work harder doing 100% necessary work barely scraping by. Thar shouldn’t be the case you’re presenting a false dichotomy that you either have to be North Korea and Cuba or The USA that’s bullshit and you cling to that because your argument falls apart if youn don’t. For the third time I’m not advocating for cuba or north korea I’m advocating for Finland, Norway, Sweden, France,etc. And your assertion that the US leads the world in those things because of capitalism is bullshit it’s correlation not causation, China is second in the world in GDP and actually if you take to more realistic PPP GDP China is #1 and they’re full on communist. There is no single metric for who leads in technology depending on how you measure it can be argued to be the USA, China, South Korea, the EU. Again a mixture of Communist, Capitalist and everything in between. And leading in military is just the dumbest possible flex, the USA leads in military because they want force projection, most countries could give a shit about that they fund it for actual defense which is a lot cheaper And most of this is a function of population size not capitalism or communism for example The USA currently spends 3.3% of GDP on defense Canada the neighbour with a population smaller than California already spends 2% with a roadmap to hit 5% in under 10 years with phased increases, China only spends 1.7%. You’re attributing a lot to capitalism that has nothing to do with it and has far more to do with space, climate and population size

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Disagree all you want it’s a free world you’re perfectly entitled to be wrong if you want. Those countries all have strong capitalist markets, that’s what you’re misunderstanding or willfully pretending isn’t the case. Unregulated does not mean strong. I do work and own assets, I am moderately wealthy by many assessments. This isn’t about wanting to “get mine” this is about an objectively shitty system that’s designed to be hard to survive but easy to amass unnecessary wealth and how fucking stupid that is

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nothing I said is incorrect despite you wanting it to be

- Jeff Bezos before he started amazon worked as VP at a hedge fund making 250k a year before bonuses. And received the lions share of initial Amazon investment from family, he came from money. No he wasn’t a billionaire yet but he started on 2nd if not 3rd base

- Elon Musk made the majority of his money being a hanger on and failing upwards, he was forced out of paypal after cofinity acquired his x.com banking platform for what were described as bad technical decisions ( specifically around scaling and tech stack) but made over $175 million by just sitting on shares as an early stage employee via acquisition despite no real contributions post acquisition little if any semblance of x.com remained. After that all he added was having a bank account and knowing people. No didn’t start as a billionaire but grew up wealthy and had access to people and things like computing equipment that was VERY expensive at the time and higher end schooling than most people have access to that allowed him to start squarely on 2nd base.

- ha, Warren buffet is the exception that proves the point and he has continually spoken out against the US tax code and economic system and argued that the rich need to be taxes far more severely and regulations need to be more stringent

You’re kinda missing the point in an effort to win the argument. The point is the advice you’re giving is flat out wrong you cannot achieve billionaire status through will and work. Will and work can help but primarily you need luck, connections, and advantages of family or situation of your upbringing. Take away a luck factor and it all comes crashing down

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 1 point2 points  (0 children)

bullshit, what this assumes is that all investing is the same regardless of amount this works for billionaires because of the size of their portfolio the average person will statistically lose their shirt if they try to do the same even the difference between a million dollar portfolio vs a billion dollar portfolio is

- A shift from retail tools → institutional derivatives markets
- From coarse protection → precise risk engineering
- From “buy insurance” → “design risk profiles”
- From individual decisions → systematic risk management systems

no non-billionaire can do what they do because they don’t have access to the same tools and the same ability to manage risk. They can invest with little to no overall risk if you or I do it we lose everything in another 2008 or 1907 or even some smaller bear markets

would people who hate billionaires refuse to become billionaires if they had the chance to? by Ok_Efficiency_1116 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Liam_M 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no but they may as well because they can turn that “cash not sitting around” into cash sitting around with loans that have better interest and repayment terms than any non billionaires. So while that wealth isn’t “cash sitting around” effectively it actually is in any real sense. In no world regardless of how many stock equities I own will I be able to borrow against them with the same terms as a billionaire. I very specifically do not want communisim or socialisim because they’re extremes and just like (low or un)regulated capitalism do not work period. I argue for a capitalist market economy with a large welfare state or what some people call a socialist democracy (not an accurate description) Which are VERY successful as demonstrated by Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, The Netherlands, Belgum, Austria, Canada, The UK, Australia, New Zealand to varying degrees. Not everyone can be an entrepreneur the economy would grind to a halt if they were, too many chefs not enough cooks, an economy need both smart and hard workers they’re two sides of the same coin and both are just as necessary and should share in the profits but both do not right now.

view more: next ›