They weren’t very well represented until the last century, IMO.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Well, they dominated the Greeks, then the Roman Empire, then the Enlightenment, and even the Progressivists were highly influential in the late 19th century . . .
I was referring to our present culture/country.
Most of the population was too busy living to bother with the nonsense. Once mama become Rosie the Riveter it became necessary to limit the annoying creatures that kept getting wrapped around the ankles, slowing her down. That’s when society as a whole started drinking the liberal hemlock.
It was definitely teetering before that, but it was then when it went into the abyss.
That’s my story and I’m stickin to it.
. . . and the plot thickens . . .
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/bring-lawsuits-elon-musk-terminates-deal-buy-twitter
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/bring-lawsuits-elon-musk-terminates-deal-buy-twitter
The writer doesn’t understand the issue.
Twitter has to sue because if they don’t it is an admission that Musk is right.
But the lawsuit will prove that he is right, only more slowly and dramatically. And they know it.
Hmm. My perception was that the author was implying the exact same thing you're asserting. Musk has firmly lodged Twitter between a woke rock and a fiduciary hard place.
No, at one point the writer specifically asserted that the only thing that matters is that Musk signed an agreement to purchase and therefore must purchase.
He evidently doesn’t understand the clauses in the contract.
Only a fool would sign a contract to buy a house, making an extremely generous offer, without inspection. Musk ain’t no fool.
The question that must be answered, in order to understand what is happening, is what was Elon’s goal in the first place. I believe that it will become obvious that he knew what they were doing, and that he played them.
This is what I’ve been saying to my wife since day one.
For the most part, @steve, I think you and I are saying the exact same thing. I do realize that, at the end Zero Durden asserted that what Musk is asserting is "bunk," but earlier in the piece he wrote, "Of course, none of that will stick as Elon waived all rights to rework the deal when he signed the purchase agreement on April 25, and now it will be up to either i) a judge to impose the original deal, an outcome which will likely take place after several years of lawsuits or ii) to renegotiate the purchase price lower." (emphasis added by Durden) What Durden bolded is that (despite Musk's legal argument being bunk), the possibility is that either the price can be renegotiated lower or, even if the judge reimposes the original deal, that will not be finalized for multiple years, during which the original Honchos of Twitter will see their share prices drop like stones, and during which -- much more importantly -- the public will follow the machinations of the legal proceedings even more closely than they did Johnny Depp's successful raking over the coals of Amber Heard. And, in the end, the richest man in the world can afford any amount of legal wrangling, while Twitter itself and what it's been up to will be laid bare for all to see. What we think we know now is only the tip of the iceberg of what is going to come out.
And I think Durden knows this. He doesn't like it, because he's a stocks guy and his Twitter investment is currently tanking, but he knows this isn't some kind of slam dunk no matter what Musk signed, and Durden also knows that Musk's sensibilities in the matter align much more closely with Durden's than the Twitter Honchos' do.
I, your Grasshopper, therefore wholeheartedly agree with both you, my Zen Trucker Master, and @NickF: while he might not have seen exactly how the game would end, it has been Musk's intention all along to play this chess game pretty much exactly as he's playing it, knowing that, in the broad context, a stalemate led up to by even the loss of almost all of his other pieces, will still be a Net Win for him, not to mention for all the other people in the world negatively affected by Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.
And on another front -- full disclosure: I'm substantially invested in Bitcoin and am only increasingly buying while it's down -- two cautionary warnings about cryptocurrency from Matt Taibbi:
taibbi.substack.com
and
taibbi.substack.com
Anything Blackrock starts to take over will turn evil, and the vast majority of cryptocurrencies share an eventual fate of being entirely controlled by one form or another of the ruling classes, but the important distinction is to remember that just because something is a 'cryptocurrency' doesn't mean it's designed to be private and/or separated from the control of central banks. My perception is that even the supposed bad news about Coinbase is part of the hype purposefully designed to diminish faith in Bitcoin and the handful of cryptos that have full legitimacy.
But nothing is a sure thing. My thinking, though, is that, other than real estate and essential perishables, one has to find better harbors for one's investments than in fiat money, which is being taxed/inflated away right now at a 25-35% annual rate.
Return of the Great American Bubble Machine
Albeit with new wrapping and new jargon, crypto has been infected by the same old problems of insider finance
taibbi.substack.com
and
The Financial Bubble Era Comes Full Circle
An unstable encounter with a $50 billion stablecoin
taibbi.substack.com
Anything Blackrock starts to take over will turn evil, and the vast majority of cryptocurrencies share an eventual fate of being entirely controlled by one form or another of the ruling classes, but the important distinction is to remember that just because something is a 'cryptocurrency' doesn't mean it's designed to be private and/or separated from the control of central banks. My perception is that even the supposed bad news about Coinbase is part of the hype purposefully designed to diminish faith in Bitcoin and the handful of cryptos that have full legitimacy.
But nothing is a sure thing. My thinking, though, is that, other than real estate and essential perishables, one has to find better harbors for one's investments than in fiat money, which is being taxed/inflated away right now at a 25-35% annual rate.
Sorry, it’ll be iii) the judge will state that Twitter did not live up to the conditions in the contract and that the deal is null and void.
During the discovery it will come to light that Twitter is hollow and advertising rates will go through the floor along with the stock price. Financially everyone loses, some more than others.
Elon walks away as the peoples hero, having exposed and punished corporate greed and lies. He blew some mad money and got respect in return.
The other platforms realize that the control free speech game is a losing strategy, some sharks play a very aggressive game of “chicken”.
Meanwhile, conservatives take over congress and start turning the tables on watermelon head, pelousy and etc.
Rioting in the streets ensues along with food and fuel shortages. Just in time for the coldest part of winter.
And that’s the good news, I haven’t figured out the bad part yet.
“But Ashley St. Clair offered an alternative: “Elon Musk should just do a public boxing match with Parag Agrawal winner takes Twitter.””
Interesting alternative. But I don’t think that Elon ever actually wanted it.
Interesting alternative. But I don’t think that Elon ever actually wanted it.
That and I wouldn't be surprised if the whole stunt was somehow arranged with his financing to turn him a tidy profit no matter if the deal went through or not. I believe he set things up to profit no matter which way the chips fell.
Very possible, he is an astute businessman.
I just realized that it did provide cover for selling some of his Tesla stock, which otherwise might have caused it a lot of damage. Just a side benefit.
I love your optimism, Steve!