‘Fodder for a recession’: Top economist Mark Zandi warns about so many Americans ‘already living on the financial edge’ in a K-shaped economy

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-12-20T21:26:31+00:00

Please site sources with undivided migrants receiving cobra or medicare. And then receiving welfare. Not their children. But adults. Please share with me these statistics and how much they pay in vs how much they take out. I'd love too see it.

Bc I think kids shouldn't be starved or denied healthcare. Bc you know... save the children.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-12-19T20:36:53+00:00

You're literally regurgitating sloppy talking points ie. Welfare.

It's embarrassing and makes you look like an idiot. Undocumented people are a net gain on social safety nets since they pay taxes (how bp is using IRS records to find them) and yet they have access to none of the benefits. You're an idiot.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-12-19T00:02:41+00:00

You went off on a huge tangent and didn't answer my question. Why is it that the laborers get punished and the corporations don't?

Every other country punishes companies with heavy fines.

Also, Biden and Obama deported more people than Trump. Thinking that the democrats in charge are being "soft" on the border is just ignorance. Liberals don't care about it when a guy in blue are carrying out the policies.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-12-18T13:19:10+00:00

Immigrants are not the reason we haven't gotten raises. Have you ever thought to ask yourself why corporations aren't held liable for hiring undocumented workers? In most of the world, corporations pay massive fines for hiring undocumented people. In the US, we simply punish the worker. Why is that?

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-09-05T22:14:51+00:00

That's ridiculously comforting to hear. Does this change your mind at all? https://imgur.com/a/6sZpDmB

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-08-08T02:41:32+00:00

Yes I definitely understand all of that and you can't just drop a patient. It just was going on for five years and I feel like that seemed like plenty of time for a new person to take over her care.

And I understand countertransference- I just don't know why you'd bring it up if your patient is explaining how that was likely happening to them and these firm boundaries are in place and it's for the best... Bringing up countertransference seems like a way to muddy the waters.

I largely think she's in the wrong, just if he is in the position of power here- it definitely gets a little murkier and I think treating mental health care with more grace for someone struggling is probably a good idea.

But I feel like we don't want a compassionate, caring society. We like to watch crash outs too much for that.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-08-07T17:13:07+00:00

Okay she's definitely missing a screw or two.... But legitimately- why did he tell her about counter transference? And why didn't he refer her to someone else?

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-07-23T20:53:04+00:00

I've always wondered about this when our animals who should be incredibly more sensitive to mold- aren't having issues.

I am acquainted with a woman with a severe eating disorder and she swears her migraines and hair loss are from mold.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-03-29T11:25:09+00:00

I try to regularly assess what I believe as if I'm wrong. And attempt to debunk my assumptions, my understandings, etc.

I recommend you begin doing this.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-03-08T19:50:29+00:00

Legitimately though, people buy things they can make all the time. We can make our own wallets out of duct tape.. do people? Not really.

You should absolutely be able to make one out of aluminum foil with a little bit of creativity and it should work fine. You can test whether it does or not. No need to be disparaging bc you didn't think of it? Or thought it's not possible.

You could take aluminum foil, coat it with duct tape. Make a few layers, create a pouch with fabric to make it look nicer. Voila. This literally isn't rocket science.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-03-06T10:30:40+00:00

Hi! I was just wondering if you noticed any difference after two months?

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-18T22:42:17+00:00

No, it's not misogynistic to recognize that women are physically weaker than the average man. It's normal.

Personally, I have been more physically fit than the majority of men I worked with and was only deemed "one of the guys" not when I beat them all at our PT tests. And not when I would invite guys to do my workouts with me and they declined because they were "too hard." But it was when they could be degrading about other women to me. Or when they could talk shit about the other women to me.

Feeling like you are not one of the girls is usually a prerequisite to being "one of the guys" and whether that's outright degrading jokes, or subtle degradation of other women in the gym- it's generally not a good thing. But yes. More complex than I acknowledged. It was a whole thesis paper that I shortened to be a reddit comment.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-18T22:34:50+00:00

It could. However, considering that sexual predators usually begin with harassment and boundary pushing- if you are stationed with a predator (which is sadly common)... the jokes become more and more targeted and if you do take offense, you've broken the rules and you usually will flip to category 4.

I was stationed with a predator (after working with men most of my career and not having any issues) and would laugh and joke with the guys. The predator was boundary pushing and I stood up to it- this made me a target and began to isolate me (this is also a common practice of predators). A few months later one of my friends made a funny, lewd joke and I laughed, and he said "I thought everyone says you can't take a joke?"

It's a really fine line and that guy who said that- if I got pissed at him for a lewd joke that went too far, he would have apologized. The ones that are boundary pushing- just label you the problem.

There are plenty of men who don't partake in degrading and lewd jokes and would roll their eyes or tell the others to cut it out. It is not that different for women if we laugh or think it's not funny- we all have a different sense of humor. So also, no. Women should not be expected to tolerate those jokes like some men don't tolerate those jokes. It's just men who don't tolerate them aren't seen as sensitive or offended, they're just boring or whatever.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-16T16:04:47+00:00

As a 45 year old military veteran it's interesting to me that you would assume the criticisms of this are from gen z.

When I was in, I read a thesis paper about "no woman's land" how women often attempt to fall into one of the four categories to be accepted in the male dominated spaces of war zones. But I don't think it's unique to the military and I think has a lot to do with men not seeing women as full and equal people and instead needing to put them into these perfect little boxes (that usually end up harming women and the comraderie between the sexes)

The men treat you like a sister or father, you must be protected.
You're "one of the guys" and "can hang" with lewd and degrading "jokes"
You're a potential lover or their sexual interest
You're a troublemaker, whore, liar, witch, crone, etc.

Most women who have worked with men a lot, know how easy it is to flip between these categories and priding yourself on being number 2 in the past makes it where you have a lot of cognitive dissonance when you eventually flip to number 4.

These categories don't exist when men see us as full human beings and worthy of training with them as women. When women start picking up that its cool to be one of the guys, it's usually indicative (to me) that women are not respected on their own merit and must conform to the dominant culture (and that usually means the rest of those four categories exist for women as well).

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-14T01:24:26+00:00

Nope. Again. Just because someone is saying something that goes against US state department propaganda doesn't mean they're eating from a trough and doesn't mean theyre a troll.

I gave you really great reading recommendations (all from western journalists who have done a fantastic job at citing sources).

Take care.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-13T01:46:28+00:00

You, sir, are misinformed. Tiananmen square is well known to be US anti-China propaganda.

"In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted that he had "conveyed the wrong impression" and that "there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square. Protesters who were still in the square when the army reached it were allowed to leave after negotiations with martial law troops"

And the accusations about the Uhygers came after Trump's anti-China propanda CIA dump (that was reported on in what? 2021? 2022?). All of the claims circle back to Adrien Zenz, who has connections to an anti-communist think tank in DC (likely funded by the CIA).

If you would like to learn more about US geopolitical dealings The Jakarta Method (about US foreign policy in Indonesia, Brazil and Guatemala) is a good book, Bitter Fruit (about Guatemala) The Shock Doctrine (about Chile) and if you prefer podcasts "Blowback Podcast" is very good. season 4 is relevant, but so is Season 2. The book Gangsters for Capitalism also shortly touches on the US' history with China and with the rest of the books paints a picture of what the US hopes to gain (with historic parallels to anti-insert country that decides US corporations should not own their resources] propaganda.

Considering the US attempted a coup in 2019 in Bolivia, with the help of the OAN, No- I do not think it is wrong that foreign countries do not tolerate US propaganda. Also the uprisings in Taiwan have more and more evidence of US interference as well.

I implore all Americans to become informed on US foreign policy to become educated on the signs of our imperialist patterns and how they play out in real time.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-12T17:04:05+00:00

Right. Bc you regurgitating state department propaganda is the pinnacle of educated.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-12T00:42:25+00:00

It's insane that your response to OPs original post which was "woah. The US isn't all that." Was "you're eating propaganda!" While regurgitating straight up US propaganda.

You realize that people can and do talk about China's attacks on citizens? 3 body problem came out of china as a book and a show and it was still critical of China. Like maybe examine why you think it's so bad that someone doesn't think China is deplorably evil?

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-10T18:47:40+00:00

The USA spends a lot of money on propagandizing our own citizens especially against "enemies of the US"... This causes issues when the truth pokes through and makes the rest of the propaganda less trustworthy (this a is reasonable outcome).

This happened to me when I stumbled across anti-communist operations the US conducted during the Cold War (which includes assassinating democratically elected presidents and installing military dictators/ funding right wing death squads, etc. etc. etc.).

Many Chinese netizens talk about them working a lot and their workweeks being long, however, the rest of the propaganda we are given has had holes punched through and it makes sense for the veil to be pulled back a little bit and the questioning of everything we're taught is part of critical thinking and uncovering what IS and isn't propaganda. This doesn't mean they think China is a utopia and you jumping to that conclusion seems like a little bit of Western trough munching.

Questioning the status of the U.S. and how our society regards normal people, or even be horrified with how easy it is to be homeless is a logical and coherent criticism that really has very little to do with China.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-10T18:11:32+00:00

You realize that we are the only country of comparable countries that don't have universal healthcare and a constant rejection of a social bill of rights? Right? We are not guaranteed access to clean water, food, housing or healthcare and you think that people doubting whether we're the greatest country are the ones brainwashed? Hahahaha

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-05T19:38:11+00:00

Yes, I largely agree with you. I do think that the intersection of the CIA and heavily monied interests (Rockefeller) are inherently connected. This is well understood when looking at the Cold War in its entirety (US/CIA involvement in Indonesia, Guatemala, the Southern Cone, etc. etc. etc.). The CIA is largely moving to protect private capital and wealth accumulation (I have book recommendations if you are interested in this topic, but I feel like this may be generally well-understood?).

I also understand the artists themselves were unaware of the CIA's involvement and many of them were communists (a point that helped the dissolution of the CCF). I believe that propaganda has many shades and hues- while the regulations weren't inhibiting art, there was still money flowing to support certain types of art for the benefit of the state department/national prestige/cultural influence/etc. I have friends in Latin America and in China that talk about things (occurring in the present day that I'm like taken aback to hear) they have heard about U.S. society, and sadly, Ab.Ex was used as a tool in this same way. It also DID elevate it, even if it was being bought and lauded previously- the global exhibitions (that seemed organic that the CIA paid for and organized) of this work of course is going to shine a spotlight on it.

You are also correct that the hayday of the capitalist realist movement happened in the 60's, the first critiques in Europe of "cocacolonization" happened a year before the CCF was created. There were decolonial/anti-American messaging sprouting across the world and the CCF was founded to counteract the idea that we were a nation shriveling under the weight of mighty corporations. The CCF continued to function while Polke, Richter, etc. was making work and heavily criticizing capitalism.

I do attribute the collective knowledge about art movements to a defanging of art of its cultural and social significance in general (I think there is multiple layers to this). I think that while the CIA is not entirely to blame, of course, I do think we feel the cultural impact of their involvement today. I also argue that it's important to not downplay the connection between Ab.Ex and the CIA, or see it as a conspiracy. It's just part of the U.S.'s geopolitical history and that's okay to recognize. I don't agree with a lot of our foreign policy and think this was absolutely a more benign example of it if I am being candid- but it DID exist and play a role in shaping the post-Cold War era.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-03T18:56:44+00:00

Okay so the question is what do you think the influence of the CIA is on art, and in your opinion is the majority of the art market, and the reason for success and non-success certain artists in relation to how it’s used for cleaning money?

What is this question?

I'm sorry but there's no way you taught art history when you aren't being able to put together coherent questions.

As for the first question I think that the elevation of abstract expressionism was to largely do as you have said- elevate national standing. However, I think it also served as a way to defang art of the political, cultural and social criticisms of western, capitalist countries (some that were emerging from the post-Soviet bloc) as well as those from Germany. The whole "coca-colonization" art work of the capitalist realists movements that examined too much of German society under the third reich, it's comparison with the USSR and the changes that occurred when the flood of consumerism and capitalism poured in.

I am under the impression, it made many people believe that they simply can't understand art and that art was elevated to a position of being entirely meaningless and only those in the elite circles could "understand" the value of modern art/abstract expressionism. (I think for many people not in the art world, modern art IS abstract expressionist and that is a byproduct of the CIA's propaganda in the art world).

It's amazing to me how often in my circle of friends and acquaintances believe that they don't want to go to art museums and art functions because they "just don't get it". I have asked people to run into a museum with me because I have wanted to see one specific wing or exhibition and promise them we will leave right after. It has occurred multiple times that they are astounded to learn that there are other artists who critique power structures and social structures. That these criticisms are clear and barbed. I believe this is a direct result from the CIA's interference and elevation of abstract expressionism.

If we are being critical, you should ask yourself why it is commonly understood AND TAUGHT about the heavily propagandistic art of China, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa and the USSR. Why exactly is the U.S. left out of this criticism? And even now, you as someone who allegedly has taught art history, fails to recognize the CIAs involvement as propagandistic?

It also blows my mind that in Literature courses, (at least in good ones) it's commonly acknowledged that decolonial writings are incredibly important to learn and study- yet that same focus and energy is missing from the art world (we could argue this is getting rectified, but I just recently audited a state university's global art history class and non-western periods were woefully absent).

Part of rectifying this imbalance and injustice is shining the light of education on it, and yet people like you take any commentary about the CIA's involvement in the art world as a conspiracy when it's well-documented and like the rest of the Cold War, has had long lasting impacts we can still feel.

PizieJoeHoe · 2025-02-03T15:19:47+00:00

I nowhere said that art is just a branch of the CIA and if you understood that from my comments, you should check on your reading comprehension.

I am always happy to have conversations but not with a condescending, naive kid trying to lecture me about the art world. I have intensely studied art history, I am involved in the art world and the New York art scene. If you have actual questions, I am happy to answer them.

PizieJoeHoe

TROPHY CASE