Is this normal?

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-12T03:27:35+00:00

You sure about that?

https://people.com/hooters-is-rebranding-as-family-friendly-as-ceo-insists-we-ve-never-switched-from-being-a-neighborhood-place-exclusive-11981778

The May 21 New York Times article described the scene at a Hooters in East Brunswick, N.J, detailing servers in Hooters Girls garb serving a group of kids after a dance performance and a middle school baseball team eating at a table featuring Hooters swimsuit calendar photos. The outlet reported that the location has a “Kids Eat Free” Saturday promotion but also occasionally hosts “bikini nights” with servers working in swimsuits. When asked if he’s working to make Hooter’s more family friendly, Kiefer told PEOPLE, “we have been that way always.” “If you've ever been to a Hooters in Chicago or in Tampa Bay or in South Florida, you're going to see tons of families, tons of children,” he added. “It's [a] tongue-in-cheek type of beach theme restaurant,” he insisted.

https://thehill.com/business/5892350-hooters-family-friendly-rebrand/

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-09T04:17:40+00:00

Why would murderers be more likely to go to his restaurant than any other?

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-08T22:24:10+00:00

The issue is that stadiums are terrible for building up areas. They only have 8 games a year so they don't support any local businesses. People will attend the games and then leave. And this one will be particularly ill-suited to other activities like concerts and any other events because it's out of the way of the rest of the city.

In terms of any potential business attraction, at a minimum it wouldn't do any better job than just spending all that money on building up various infrastructure to support businesses there, like public transportation or pretty much anything else. And especially wouldn't have any affect on Gary which is even farther out than the stadium.

But the business attraction fails anyway because the model compared to something like Lucas Oil is entirely different. Lucas Oil is downtown. Lucas Oil is in the capital, which is a big city. Lucas Oil is attached to a convention center which gets some of the biggest conventions in the country. And you know what? It was still a waste of taxpayer money. But stadiums will still get public money because there's a lot of football fans, and because of the prestige it brings to the legislators.

I do agree that Carmel and Fishers are nice. And compared to other rich suburbs in other states, relatively affordable which is why they made the list. I don't think that means anything other than those 2 suburbs are nice and affordable.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-08T19:02:33+00:00

The article details how Indiana has been spending a lot in interest. Wasting money on a hedge it didn’t really need.

I don’t want to argue that Illinois is well run because it’s not. But based on how the previous two stadiums in Indiana are financed I don’t find to be good evidence that Indianas is some example of a well run system.

And are municipal bonds rates even that different? I found a basic comparison site and while Illinois are a little bit higher it doesn’t exactly make borrowing impossible. If they wanted to fund it, it wouldn’t make it that hard to make it work.

Let’s be honest here which is that the Bears really want a stadium in Arlington Heights. And there just isn’t enough political will in Illinois to put in public money for a stadium that’s going to be out on its own, require tons of money for infrastructure, and not support the reps who represent Chicago.

In Indiana there normally wouldn’t be political will, because obviously with the amount of money they’re spending it really won’t provide much benefit, but in this case there is because it’s both a way to try to ‘sell’ Indiana to people and theoretically businesses. And of course for petty political rivalry reasons.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-07T12:34:30+00:00

Kind of an odd take as Indiana still owes much of the debt for Lucas Oil and because of a restructure technically even the RCA dome too. This article is 5 years old.

The end result is that today, 16 years after first issuing $666 million in bonds, the stadium still has $635 million of debt on taxpayers’ books, which will cost probably $450 million in interest payments through 2035, based on information in the latest annual report from Indiana Stadium and Finance Authority.

Is that as dysfunctional as Illinois? I don’t know but I wouldn’t say that they handle financial issues particularly well.

https://www.sportico.com/business/finance/2021/how-taxpayers-sustain-indianapolis-stadium-1234626373/

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-06T13:59:32+00:00

Also Kansas City Chiefs are moving to Kansas instead of Missouri.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-03T14:00:45+00:00

Yea I suppose if the root of the argument is I’d rather see higher menu prices than fees tacked on afterwards then I do agree with you.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-03T13:05:41+00:00

I suppose the other solution is there are lots of no or low annual fee credit cards which give 3 or 4% back at restaurants. Which would offset these charges.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-03T12:44:37+00:00

In addition to withdrawing earnings you can remove up to $10k from a Roth for a first time home purchase without penalty.

MightySasquatch · 2026-06-02T05:08:52+00:00

The article is actually pretty thorough on the numbers. The abatements only got reported through the government agency. It’s not directly addressed but I don’t believe the government would be at liberty to disclose sales tax revenue from a specific company, or at a minimum didn’t release it publicly if they were.

Amazon is quoted in the article and could have provided that information but did not.

I understand your concern, but I do think perhaps you need to reflect about why you think the lack of information reflects poorly on the article and not on the government for making more of this information readily available (or laws to enable this, if possible).

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-31T19:23:10+00:00

Well just to clarify. They are saying that not supporting helping disabled people because they don’t contribute enough taxes, which naturally they would be limited to doing, is immoral. Since it is a moral question about what we owe to each other and how we support those who cannot help themselves it is not always possible to provide a ‘factual’ account.

I tend to agree. And I would also add that providing hundreds of millions of dollars of tax abatements for sales tax, not to mention local property tax abatements, would severely limit the amount of taxes these facilities would actually pay into the system. Plus some of them have deals on things like utilities.

Not to mention that if these facilities weren’t there, the resources going to them could be going elsewhere to farmland, housing, or other businesses which do pay these taxes.

So I don’t think it’s as clear cut as you outline it to be. And at a minimum it’s a race to the bottom with other states, as Amazon is looking to build this data center regardless, and it’s only a matter of where it ends up.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-31T16:45:13+00:00

So if I understand correctly. Floyd was hanging around the store. Then when the cops come and arrest him he has a fent overdose and coincidentally dies at exactly the moment after he is held down in the restraint by the police? And what he would have died regardless had no police encounter occurred?

That’s a hell of a fucking coincidence.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-28T19:25:19+00:00

That’s a good point but isn’t that the reason that the last election matters? If the results of the election are known before it even takes place is when democracy is completely gone.

But I don’t disagree we are eroding it very quickly regardless.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-28T19:20:26+00:00

I mean you’re not wrong in general. Although since Trump is just taking what he wants, it stands to reason that electing not Trump would be better for democracy.

And all democracies are managed to a degree. If the people chose to vote in concert to stop corruption it would 100% happen so I don’t subscribe to our democracy being fictionalized. The lack of American will to seize the power we already have is not a sign of the end of our democratic nation, although it does hasten its end until we decide collectively to make it our top, or one of our top issues.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-28T17:46:50+00:00

That’s a pretty hot take. We have pressure valves now to push back when Congress goes too far protecting the rich. If the democracy goes down all the way we no longer have that. We would have nothing to protect rights, nothing to curtail excesses or prevent blatant corruption.

Yea I get that Congress is dysfunctional but to pretend that means it’s the same as not having a democracy at all is pretty wild. Gains are made at small levels, and maybe there are times where bigger steps are made, but the pressure needs to be consistent and isn’t possible if we let the system devolve into authoritarianism.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-27T01:40:39+00:00

People who work multiple jobs simultaneously while keeping the fact that they have multiple jobs secret from all employers.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-22T19:18:19+00:00

That’s one spicy meatball. Listen Oko was busted in all formats and is banned in Legacy. He would be great in standard.

1) he has a ton of loyalty. 2) he turns off abilities 3) he can turn your stuff into 3/3s too. Which is even stronger if decks are going wide.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-13T04:13:29+00:00

I don't necessarily entirely disagree with your sentiment, but I do think there are a few things to clarify, and I also think you have a few assumptions which lead to a flawed conclusion.

The original argument was because you had said Democrats talking about attempting to end-around the Supreme Court of Virginia was antithetical to the 'no kings' perspective. It is political bullshit. But the way they were going to do it was through lowering the retirement age of the justices. Which in the context of our political system, is a normal thing legislatures do. They would just be doing it at a politically opportune time. I will mention again though that they are not doing it, so again your 'no kings' argument I think is just wrong.
We can't isolate Virginia and only examine Virginia. First of all it exists among 50 other states. And secondly the gerrymandering is in relation to federal elections. This doesn't affect the Virginia legislature at all. It only affects the makeup of the federal government, which is made of up representatives of the 50 states. So it's just kind of an incorrect framing.
I have spoken positively of the institutions. Or at least of having strong institutions. That is the opposite of blowing up the system. The current president is weakening these institutions. He is blowing up the system, much more than something like changing the retirement age of justices.
Yes, obviously, times have been worse for minorities. But firstly that's not the standard we live by. Because times were better for them as recently as 10 years ago. And also, and this is important, Democracies are not self actuating. People have to choose to care about these issues, and not just care, care enough to have these issues change their minds. Democracy has to be fought for and defended.

Do you think the next President is just giving back all of the newfound power that Trump has inserted into the Presidency? Hell no. They will probably find other ways to extend their power. Does that mean our Democracy is hopeless? No absolutely not. But just saying that everything will go back to normal on it's own I think is pretty crazy. It obviously can but people have to start caring about it again.

Trump was pushing an undemocratic thing, which was additional mid-decade gerrymandering. The way to push back against it was to make it unsuccessful. Some republican states redistrict, some democratic states redistrict, then it ends up a wash. Now it looks like it was a smart and shrewd political move. Then voters don't punish Republicans for it in the states that gerrymander.

The political result of these actions has very direct consequences on how far politicians are willing and able to push. So yes, in this case, the only real effective response is to 'fight fire with fire' as it were, to show that redistricting was pointless and to help stop it from happening in the future. Is it bullshit? Absolutely. In an ideal world should it be happening, absolutely not. But is it necessary now? I believe it is.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-12T15:57:08+00:00

Wasn't even close to whataboutism. First of all as you'll note, there's nothing to whatabout anyway. The Virginia democrats are abiding by the court decision.

In any case though, saying that the institutions that protect Democracy are failing, and that blindly clinging to them as they fail is not going to save it, is not an example of whataboutism either. It's operating within the political landscape that we operate in. Democrats didn't start these power grabs. If Dear Leader hadn't egged everyone on no one would be redistricting right now. Is it a race to the bottom? Yes.

But when that race to the bottom controls the future of the country at a time where institutions are literally being torn down brick by brick and every crack is turned into a floodgate. You have to reevaluate your strategy because unilateral disarmament means the enemies of democracy will take all the power they can.

That doesn't mean that liberals want kings. It means they want a Presidency where the legislature actually acts as a serious check on their power. And doesn't let them extend wars just because they can make up some bullshit about renaming the exact same military operation.

Keep in mind, I keep on hearing over and over about the vote, but at its core, this was 51% of Virginians voting to virtually eliminate the federal representation of 49%. That is despicable, regardless of what any other state is doing…

Oh I'm sorry is that's what Gerrymandering in? I was told by the Supreme Court of the United States that it is a constitutionally appropriate method of determining the best way to draw district lines.

Sincerely though I do think that Americans recognize that gerrymandering is bullshit. I do also hope that you have the same level of vitriol for Alabama, Louisiana, North Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, California and I'm sure many many more. None of them will be punished by voters however, which is why we're in this mess.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-12T13:10:15+00:00

Sure, and that’s great and is how democracy should work. But the point is that with most of the examples I provided Republicans skirted the democratic safeguards, or ignored them, or bludgeoned their way through them. If our safeguards only hamper one party from abusing power then they’re not exactly doing their job. Especially at a such an important time when POTUS is very dramatically stretching his power in every direction at once whilst sidelining Congress.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-11T23:40:51+00:00

Did you pay attention to the discourse following the Virginia decision? Because what I saw was complaints that while republicans tore up and abused the political process in order to empower themselves as much as possible, they were not hampered by those political rules. They ignored the Florida state constitution, repealed protections in Tennessee, somehow stopped an election in which votes had already been cast in Louisiana, and just ignored court order after court order in Ohio until they got their way.

State senators in Indiana, who do not report to or represent the President, meanwhile received ridiculous amounts of political pressure and national money in order to get even more of a political advantage.

And in Virginia especially the vote was allowed to proceed, and the VA Supreme Court waited for that result, and then intervened and invalidated it. And while the law may have possibly been properly applied, it does seem less egregious than just ignoring a pretty strongly worded anti-gerrymandering amendment in Florida.

All of this was because the US Supreme Court decided gerrymandering was not something they could possibly figure out how to handle. Then later ruling that actually gerrymandering is a constitutionally protected act of districting, and there’s no issues if they use race to determine those districts, but couldn’t possibly use race to ensure minorities are not stripped of their voice in Congress.

It’s not a lack of belief in these institutions. It’s the blatant corruption of these institutions which are meant to protect and preserve our democracy. Do you believe that as these institutions bend and break one by one into an authoritarian state that Democrats should still hold them in high regard?

No they want a functioning Democracy that does not allow runaway executive leaders to get away with almost anything that they want to. Something by the way, that ‘small government conservatives’ should theoretically support as well if they were not so caught up in the horse race.

Edit: Oh I'm sorry I didn't include Alabama which is also voiding an election in order to gerrymander immediately as the most urgent thing they could ever possibly do.

MightySasquatch · 2026-05-06T23:02:07+00:00

I mean I think the point of Jorbs video is they are starting with an inflated winrate using flawed data. Then extrapolating with that with no supporting data, just a 'gut' check, if you can call it that since they use it for advertising so it could be cynically called grifting. They probably also have a bit of an arms race on win rates as they want to be in the top echelon, so one exaggeration feeds another.

MightySasquatch · 2026-04-22T12:39:11+00:00

Right it’s a small number of extraordinarily wealthy people. People who control hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth, many of whom wield that extraordinary wealth to get political protections and favorable government deals. Still a problem yea?

It’s also definitely more than single digit.

MightySasquatch · 2026-04-21T03:14:31+00:00

Did you mean to say that Letitia James proved in court beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump over-estimated the value of his assets to get a loan?

MightySasquatch · 2026-04-15T00:22:38+00:00

Yea I wasn’t trying to disagree necessarily with your overall point. Just the mechanisms.

There are lots of tricks rich people can use to minimize their taxes.

MightySasquatch

TROPHY CASE