Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Delinquency rate appears to be returning to normal. (Pre-Covid). Just guessing, but I think eviction and foreclosure protection granted during COVID had more to do with the lower rate than anything else.
[quote quote=7430]I like this court. Good focus on the actual constitution and a couple of crazy lefties who allow us to see the bullets we dodged by electing Trump.[/quote]
Copy that.
Skim read Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent. Interesting that she never addresses the constitutionality in using race as a factor for college admission. She cites repeatedly transgressions against blacks over the last 250 years. Mentions disparities in wealth between college educated whites and blacks who did not attend college. She conveniently overlooked similar disparities between whites who attended college and those who did not.
She hit all the talking points about inequality, but missed completely that 50 years of affirmative action has not eliminated racism or provided more and better opportunities for minorities.
Bottom line, she is ok with ignoring the Constitution to correct racial inequities even though affirmative action has done little or nothing to right those perceived wrongs.
Maybe that’s why she is former staffer.
The left’s reaction to this is typical. Questions I have posed to my liberal friends in Portland.
1) Yes or No. Do you think race should be used in hiring or college admissions? Obvious answer is yes. “So you believe it is ok to use racism to combat racism?” 🙂Other fun question. If affirmative action policies are still needed after 50 years, is it safe to say those policies aren’t working?
It’s possible to achieve diversity without using race. Socioeconomic background, zip code, nation of origin are reasonable means of building diversity. Probably better than using race.
Fauxcahontas should save her vitriol for the FDIC.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/23/investing/svb-bank-fdic/index.htmlPersonal gain or advancing a personal agenda, either one should warrant a permanent ban from holding any government position. https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/article_bc7aa75e-1045-11ee-ae02-872e646b53c2.html
I will be shocked if charges are filed against any of the participants. No one is held accountable for misdeeds, unless you are a poor schmuck who accidentally chokes out a crazy man on a subway.
Sad
[quote quote=7356]Does/can the Fed control inflation now? The treasury has a mountain of debt to refinance; several trillions of maturing debt, several trillion of current deficit spending and the Fed must shrink their balance sheet. We will see the phenomenon known as “crowding out” during the next 18 months. The appetite for US debt will drive rates more than the Fed. I think today’s action reinforces this view The Fed’s only policy “choice” is more funny money. Good luck with that.[/quote]
We have an economic policy? Who knew…..?
[quote quote=7265]Matt Gaetz saying the quiet part out loud:
Gaetz says most in GOP ‘don’t feel like we should negotiate with our hostage’
Your point? Is this materially different than Obama’s “Elections have consequences”?
A similar exodus is happening in Portland/Multnomah County. Taxes are levied on high wage earners for everything from funding “the Arts” to Preschool. Multnomah County voters recently rejected a capital gains tax earmarked to pay legal aid for evicted tenants. Proponents stated the measure failed because gains on primary residences where not excluded. Opponents of the measure doubt it was a mistake, believing the intent was to include gains on all real estate.
Residents of Seattle are moving out, but not to the extent seen in San Fransisco. Fisher Investments announced it moving it’s HQ to Texas just hours after the State Supreme court upheld a tax on capital gains.
At some point one would hope voters would wake up. It would be nice, but at this point, too much to hope for.
What’s next? OnlyFansAI? Blows my mind, she is 23 years with 1.8M followers?!
I imagine 1.79M of them are living in mommy’s basement, lights out while glued to computer scree.[quote quote=7191]I”d say Biden has been very successful at the border. It is exactly what his administration wants. You can include some of the so called Republicans too. The kicker is the troops. He can play it tough with troops which is all for show and “chaotic” at the same time without any change in outcome. Win win for Joe. Lose Lose for the country and hapless political opposition. The press will go wild with it. Pretty diabolically clever in my view.[/quote]
I think you have confused inept with clever. Just saying…
Too bad it’s behind the WSJ paywall.
I’ll take flyer here. I believe 70% of Americans favor LEGAL immigration, not the shit show that is happening now.
There are roughly 40 M people in the country living below the poverty line who want and deserve a better life for themselves and their families.
Is it too much to ask liberals to help those who are already here first?
So, I asked ChatGPT if AI should be regulated.
“As an AI language model, I don’t have personal opinions or beliefs, but I can provide information to help answer your question.
The question of whether or not the government should regulate AI is a complex and contentious issue that has been debated by scholars, policymakers, and industry experts. Some argue that regulation is necessary to ensure that AI is developed and used in a safe and ethical manner, while others argue that too much regulation could stifle innovation and hinder progress in the field.
Proponents of regulation argue that AI has the potential to cause harm if not developed and used responsibly. They argue that government oversight can help prevent unintended consequences, such as algorithmic bias, privacy violations, and safety risks. Regulations could also help ensure that AI is developed and used in a transparent and accountable manner.
Opponents of regulation argue that AI is still in its early stages of development and that regulations could stifle innovation and limit the potential benefits of the technology. They argue that industry-led standards and best practices are sufficient to ensure the safe and ethical development and use of AI.
There are also concerns about the international competitiveness of countries with different regulatory environments, and the possibility of regulatory arbitrage, where companies may move to countries with looser regulations.
In summary, the question of whether or not the government should regulate AI is a complex and nuanced issue with arguments on both sides. Ultimately, it will be up to policymakers to weigh the potential benefits and risks of regulation and determine the appropriate level of oversight.”
LOL, sounds like someone running for political office.
Two things I am certain of.
1) AI, like new technology that preceded it, will be misused and abused.
2) Government will be unable to regulate its development and growth.
