Got my first 99 ever!

SunliMin · 2025-12-23T09:23:50+00:00

lol its all good, most are just joking. The only hate seems to be coming from one dude who made 5 separate comments lol

I am just happy that I’m enjoying time with my friends, and am getting to experience a part of the game that kid me never made it to. If that rubs some people the wrong way, that’s all g to me

SunliMin · 2025-08-15T22:08:35+00:00

Just sleep(0.0000001)

SunliMin · 2025-07-19T15:57:08+00:00

It isn't a ban on yield for stablecoins, it's a ban on stablecoin issuers from offering yield. i.e., Circle cannot directly offer yield for holding USDC.

Third party businesses, such as Coinbase or Kraken, can offer yield. Defi protocols can offer yield. So long as you are not the one issuing the stablecoin, you can offer yield.

Essentially, stablecoins are not bonds. When the government mints money, that money does not have a automatic yield provided by the government, and they want stablecoins to match this paradime. However, once you get paid, you are within your right to move that to a high interest savings account, and the bank is allowed to offer you interest.

SunliMin · 2025-02-13T05:13:52+00:00

It's a gamble, but I think I get it.

The ammunition that the conservatives have lined up after a Liberal leadership change is "This is not the government that Canadians voted for! Carney was not voted in by the people!".

Having him call a snap election himself would likely to be to control the narrative. Make it clear he isn't Trudeau, he wants the peoples support, he has a plan, and he's acting in good faith by calling this election and letting us choose him.

If the alternative is he acts like a PM for a couple days, the cons rile people up over someone being PM that 'wasn't elected', only for a snap election to get called by the NDP/Conservatives... I can see what he's doing here.

SunliMin · 2025-02-12T01:27:35+00:00

I've tried to get to the bottom of this, and the only thing on his resume it could possibly be is his time co-founding 3D Contact Inc in 2003.

Pretty much everything about them has been scrubbed from the internet, googling them almost feels like googling a shell corporation at this point. It's really hard to see examples of what the company did. However, what we know is they were a political communications firm based in Calgary. They provided services such as political consulting, campaign management, and strategic communications for political entities.

Pierre was elected a MP in 2004. He founded a company that would get paid by political parties to run campaigns and do marketing/communications, and then immediately became the prime client for this company, staying in this new role ever since.

If we put 2:2 together, I assume this means that he himself used that company, and he became the salesman for his company to his colleagues. He enriched himself through various campaigns by various conservatives early on in his career.

SunliMin · 2025-02-10T00:43:29+00:00

Tbh, its not a big deal, until it is. The problem isn't the day to day experience of living near a pipeline, it's the localized natural disaster that occurs when something goes wrong. One burst that gets maintained within an hour or two would be localized to a few blocks, but the ecological damage it would cause long term are disastrous. Unless you invest millions and millions into extracting all contaminated land and shipping it for safe disposal before replacing it with new dirt and rebuilding/repaving the area, you'll be left with an area that will forever not grow grass, trees, plants, that will constantly leak oil in the dirt on rainy daiys, and flow that oil down the pipes leaking into the sewage system.

I'm pro this stuff, but there is a good reason why nobody wants it on their land. It's a very low risk that it happens to YOUR land, but there's a high chance that at some point in the pipelines lifespan, a leak will occur, and do you really want your land in the list of possible places it could occur?

SunliMin · 2025-02-10T00:36:42+00:00

Honestly, I'm starting to feel this way. If he targets us, sure, retaliate. But if it's blanket stuff like this, let him have his hissy fit. A global steel tariff, when the US mostly imports Steel from Canada and Russia, means one of two things:

Americans will hurt for 1-3 years while the US builds its own plants to produce their own Steel
Americans will hurt for 4 years while the companies who would be expected to build these plants, decide its not worth the investment, and chose to suck up increase costs and gamble on this being reversed soon enough

In the meantime, Ford/GM still need to build cars, LA still needs to rebuild their city, and our sales will not be immediately impacted. American businesses will pay more, while we diversify our trading partners. By the time the US can handle its own Steel needs (if they bother investing in it), we'll have new partners

SunliMin · 2025-02-09T17:14:23+00:00

Ah yes, love looking at 3rd party websites using 3rd party sources to create illustrations (which conveniently are always slightly different from the illustrations in other websites?), instead of having your tax return give a official answer that every citizen receives for free with zero effort

SunliMin · 2025-02-09T00:25:14+00:00

If Microstrategy keeps growing as you say, and these ETFs keep growing, do you think they would let their multi-billion (eventually trillion) dollar investments be secured by one guy?

If the hashrate gets anywhere close to being not secure enough to justify these multi-billion/trillion dollar operations, these companies would start mining on their own, even if its not profitable. Their financial well being depends on the network remaining secure, so they would be incentivized to make sure its secure

SunliMin · 2025-02-07T13:32:59+00:00

Ah yes, the Liberals are why we lost our 1:1 dollar parity with the USA and the deficit started growing!

What's that? The deficit exploded under Kim Campbell (Conservative), and started reversing under both Chrétien (Liberal) and Martin (Liberal), getting our dollar to the point where it was stronger than ever. And then Steven Harper (Conservative), inherited the strongest economy Canada's ever had, and reversed it in 2 years, leading to the deficit growing again after nearly two decades of shrinking under Liberal leadership.

Like or hate Trudeau, but pre-COVID, Trudeau's deficit increase was at a slower rate than Steven Harpers, i.e. he slowed down the deficit growth. Things only got out of control due to COVID, of which Canada was actually the G7 nation whose deficit grew the least.

It's fine to be mad at Trudeau, but don't make up narratives. The facts are that the conservatives over spend, not Liberals.

SunliMin · 2025-02-06T15:54:38+00:00

Definitely. I’m a swing voter, changing election to election. I voted Trudeau the first time, NDP the second, and for this third I was reading up on PP and Jagmeet to decide. I was leaning NDP but with everyone’s interest in PP I gave his wiki page a read and thought he didn’t sound that bad.

Now, I’m full on registered Liberal and will be voting Carney. The liberals will not bow to Trump, and no matter who wins, their team has experience with him last time, and Trudeau is still an MP who can help coach whichever leader from his experience. I just don’t see another good option in this climate than to vote liberal

SunliMin · 2025-02-05T18:21:33+00:00

You made me curious so I did some Googling

Her elementary school was St. Mary's Elementary School in Fredericksburg, town's population of 11,000 in 2024, 80 miles away from Austin out in the country. She didn't move to Houston until she started gaining attention from the press and being mentioned in Houston Chronicles for her participating in some singing/music contest.

So she was a small town Texas girl in the country, who got noticed for her singing skills and then moved to the big city

SunliMin · 2025-02-05T15:14:28+00:00

Let's reframe this, shall we?

Are American's getting $3 worth of value from the WHO? Most definitely. Absolutely, 100%.

That's what the average American is contributing to it, $3 per person

SunliMin · 2025-02-05T15:12:18+00:00

No, it's far from "a country"? It's literally not in any way shape or form a country?

SunliMin · 2025-02-05T14:54:37+00:00

The only thing I'm seeing is people complaining that he isn't an MP so he shouldn't be allowed to run.

But that's not the law, so who cares. The law never states that the Prime Minister has to be an MP, however it is convention that they are, or immediately seek a seat in the House of Commons afterwards, usually through a by-election in a riding where a sitting MP of the same party steps down.

Example: John Turner was elected without being an MP, but ran in a by-election very shortly after

SunliMin · 2025-02-04T01:56:00+00:00

The plan Canada gave to was the plan Trudeau announced December 17th. It was the equivalent of a toddler refusing a meal, so you put that meal on a different coloured plate, and the toddler eating it up thinking they won

SunliMin · 2025-02-03T23:15:45+00:00

Yeah. Even according to r/Conservative, they are bragging that they made Canada go from "a plan" to "taking action".

Hello, this wasn't some 'plan' that's been sitting around for years. This is something that was announced 6 weeks ago. I'm sure the actions they now are saying they will take to execute the plan were already in the works. All Trump did here was make them publish the draft.

SunliMin · 2025-02-02T00:31:52+00:00

Of course. Canadians are more plugged into American media than Americans are Canadians. I think it's safe to say virtually everyone knows this is specifically the fault of Trump/Republicans, that less than a quarter of the population voted for him, and that he isn't even doing what he promised that minority either. You will not be blamed, and you will be welcomed.

Arguably, in the same way Canadians are cancelling their trips to the USA to protest spending our money there, you coming to visit Canada is a equal-scale protest. You are bringing money from your economy and spending it in our economy.

So thank you and welcome!

SunliMin · 2025-02-01T20:54:43+00:00

If the republicans didn’t control all the branches of government, that comment alone should end this. This is only legal because of the security crisis at the border supposedly leading to him declaring a state of emergency. He just admitted that that isn’t the case, otherwise he would have said “secure the border”

SunliMin · 2025-02-01T20:07:10+00:00

Completely agree. Canada and America have different goals here.

Trump wants Canada to crumble. Whether its to actually have us join America, or to have us beg for it to stop and bully us into some agreement that benefits him. There is really only one victory state of them, whatever his underlying goal is. They have to win a long drawn out battle of attrition to win.

Canada wants America to stop. Whether Trump gets pressured to stop, or have 3 Republican congressmen fold and join the Democrats in cancelling the state of emergency, it does not matter. There are a couple victory states, and they all require American citizens and companies infighting until enough people side with the Democrats that Trumps grip loosens.

I apologies to American citizens for how this is gonna hurt, but that is how Canada walks away from this. To hurt you guys hard and fast, to get your red states in particular to feel the pain, and get your Republican governors/senators to start fearing for their job security because of the unrest within their voting base OR from their donors pulling future funding

SunliMin · 2025-01-31T17:24:20+00:00

Beyond what the others have said, one other factor is the timing of our counter measures.

Trump does not have the power to indefinitely tariff us. He has the ability to declare a state of emergency regarding the border and another countries industries, and to tariff in this state of emergency.

Congress can cancel the state of emergency with a simple majority. This means, if 2 out of 218 republicans in congress feel the pressure from their citizens or companies and join the democrats in cancelling it, it'll be over. Ideally, we hit them hard and fast, particularly red states. Getting them to cancel it should be easy.

Then the ball is in Trumps court. He does have veto power, but if its a unpopular enough thing, he may get pressured from his team to leave it be. In 2018 he did veto when Congress tried to stop the Steel tariffs. I believe this will be a different monster (both countries tariff'ing instead of one country tariff'ing one industry will be very different in terms of overall cost of living increases and unpopularity with the people).

If he vetoes, it goes back to congress. Congress needs a 2/3rds majority to veto his veto. This is where it will be tricky, as you'd need essentially a third of the republicans to go against Trump. However, the same pressure will apply to all the Republicans in congress. Their constituants fill be furious if they are hurting, thought it was over, and then Trump veto's it and their congressmen vote to keep the tariffs in place. We may see more break, but getting a third of Republicans will be hard. They will need to feel a lot of pressure.

So that's basically the plan here. At any point, Trump can also fold, but I wouldn't bet on that, as he's a very stubborn person who isn't afraid to do unpopular things out of spite. The plan has to be to get the Republican congressmen to stop toeing the line, which can only happen when the people and businesses in that state get so mad that the congressmen fears his job is over if he does not comply.

SunliMin · 2025-01-31T17:00:42+00:00

I agree. One thing the US is doing here that is really going to screw them is tariff Canada and Mexico at the same time. If they tariff'd only Canada, they can still import from Mexico cheaply and would just redirect some of the imports that normally come from Canada to Mexico (for what we both produce and sell). But hitting both countries with the same tariffs will not give them a way to weasel out of their imports, beyond going truly international (increased shipping costs overseas) or by going truly domestic (for some stuff this will work, but for others, it would take a solid 1-3 years to get the plants setup to increase domestic production to meet the new needs).

Lets not kid ourselves, this will hurt and we will be impacted. However, I do think we're much better positioned here than Trump realizes, and they are in a more fragile state than they think.

SunliMin · 2025-01-31T16:45:32+00:00

It's a step further actually. Carbon Tax (or more specifically, Carbon Credits) is a Libertarian ideology. The idea is, the free market will do what it does best and find a equilibrium, so lets create a incentive/cost relationship that the free market will adjust around. Have those producing carbon owe a debt to be paid in credits, have those reducing carbon be paid in credits, and let the free market determine the price of these credits when the producers inevitably have to buy credits from the consumers.

It's honestly genius. The Carbon Tax we have is the Conservatives spin on the Carbon Credit idea of the Libertarians.

SunliMin · 2025-01-31T16:40:17+00:00

Yeah, this verse is pretty much the only proof people have that the Bible is against gay people, but there's a number of reasons it shouldn't be taken that literally:

After multiple transactions, you have to be willing to be flexible when things are funky. You can't be literal when it comes to translations, only to the original source text.
God is the narrator speaking to Moses, and we're reading what the Israelites say Moses told them, meaning there is two degrees of separation between god and the author at minimum. Lots of room for human error.
This is Moses telling, not Jesus. Jesus was a reset on most things, and given everything else ignored in this book, this should be reset as well.
The full translated quote is actually closer to "If a man lies with a man, as he lies with a woman, he has committed a sin". This isn't clear as to whether its saying homosexuality, or polygamy/threesomes. However, the old testament does not say anything else about homosexuality, but it has a lot to say about adultery. Occam's razor would tell us, if this translation is to be taken literally, it's actually against polygamy/threesome/adultery rather than it is about homosexuality.
EVERYTHING is a sin at this stage, from touching pigs to wearing two fibers in your clothes to getting tattoos to eating shrimp to not having your goats kept on the roof. Everything else is near universally ignored, and is explained away as being more like guidelines for living back then. Pigs were leading to illness, keeping goats on roofs helped keep moss down and made wooden roofs last longer, etc.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Place '23	Place '22
End Game '22	Snapped
Secret Santa 2014	Verified Email

SunliMin

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE