Only insofar as you would say they destroy money supply when a loan is repaid. They just create a credit and a debit that cancel out.

Sherbet and Smarties exist in the US but we call them different things and have other things we call Sherbet and Smarties.

I don’t get why people are getting so incensed with this answer. It’s an election, it’s not fully in his control. If he thinks he’s the best candidate to beat Trump, and he runs his campaign the best way possible, and he still loses, then that is democracy and the will of the people has spoken and there was nothing he could have done.

It IS about saving democracy, and bodily autonomy, and the Supreme Court appointments, and he isn’t saying that it isn’t. He’s just saying all he can do is run the best campaign he can, and if the people still vote Trump then he accepts that decision.

You can quibble with his assumptions here, he might not be the best candidate to beat Trump anymore, but that’s the right answer.

https://i.redd.it/7slc1qkpa7l91.jpg

Do>!n!<'t for>!get you’re!< her>!e forever!<

(alright that didn’t work)

Pretty sure it’s supposed to be specifically hard-left, maybe conspiracy oriented (because they would assume Trump’s Russian ties and criminal guilt are a conspiracy theory), equivalent to Qanon but on the other side.

It was always short sighted tax policy. We’re just living with the blowback.

But in 1954, apparently intending to stimulate capital investment in manufacturing in order to counter a mild recession, Congress replaced the straight-line approach with “accelerated depreciation,” which enabled owners to take huge deductions in the early years of a project’s life. This, Hanchett says, “transformed real-estate development into a lucrative ‘tax shelter.’ An investor making a profit from rental of a new building usually avoided all taxes on that income, since the ‘loss’ from depreciation canceled it out. And when the depreciation exceeded profits from the building itself—as it virtually always did in early years—the investor could use the excess ‘loss’ to cut other income taxes.” With realestate values going up during the 1950s and ’60s, savvy investors “could build a structure, claim ‘losses’ for several years while enjoying tax-free income, then sell the project for more than they had originally invested.”

Since the “accelerated depreciation” rule did not apply to renovation of existing buildings, investors “now looked away from established downtowns, where vacant land was scarce and new construction difficult,” Hanchett says. "Instead, they rushed to put their money into projects at the suburban fringe—especially into shopping centers.

http://archive.wilsonquarterly.com/in-essence/why-america-got-malled

But Slightly More Rotting Corpse has the better environmental policy which we’ll need before the last remnant of Florida is fully swallowed by the sea in the next 4 years.

So, obviously, people don’t generally change their legal gender for an advantage somewhere. But if they do, that’s a pretty good sign, not that it’s too easy to change your gender, but that there’s a gender bias in the law.

So arguably, the easier it is to change your legal gender, the less of a problem gender-based affirmative action is. Conservatives must love this! End liberal overreach in one easy step!

They can put the reviewed items on the coffee table to keep them on camera, and it’s more professional looking than a kitchen or child’s room.

He somehow monetized being a Trump reply guy back in 2016, every Trump tweet you’d see this guy with a snarky little “well actually I prefer an X that WASN’T Y” or whatever. Within seconds.

How often do you wear a suit? Dry clean as necessary, hang it up between uses. I’ve never ironed a suit.

The one example I’m familiar with is a name brand ice cream company that produces the store brand ice cream too…in that case the recipe is different, cheaper ingredients to cut costs to the bare minimum. But using the machines for a higher volume saves money.

I’m sure ‘same exact item’ does happen too but just ‘same manufacturer’ doesn’t mean exactly the same item.

Can’t believe Harriet Tubman got all that infrastructure up.

It’s not “the beginning of a meltdown” because everybody still owns all their money and no bank is failing. There’s a customer service issue for users of a non-bank service. That is part of the risk you take when you’re putting money in a non-bank.

It sucks for the users obviously but like where would a contagion even begin? This is already the largest BaaS middleman. This is as big as this issue gets.

Metric has been legally “preferred” in the US since 1975. We just don’t use it.

Also while I was looking up that year I came across this wild factoid:

In 1793, Thomas Jefferson requested artifacts from France that could be used to adopt the metric system in the United States, and Joseph Dombey was sent from France with a standard kilogram. Before reaching the United States, Dombey’s ship was blown off course by a storm and captured by pirates, and he died in captivity on Montserrat.

It is admittedly pretty weird that a whole group of species developed a baby-juice organ that is only used by the females to feed only the young babies.

Hawking gets a Covid sample from a time traveler in 2009 and immediately travels to the Wuhan lab to study it and look for a cure, he successfully delays the pandemic and he almost gets to a cure but a bad guy time traveler comes to kill him in 2018 and without the watchful eye of Stephen Hawking, the world falls to chaos.

I’d watch that movie.

I’m not following how it’s any problem for China to just be on Russias side? They get cheap resources while focusing the West away from Taiwan and showing the West the impossibility of trying to win a proxy war against a world power. Seems like they get everything they want. So they lose out on some trade with a smaller GDP than Ethiopia, whatever.

Seems to be making the point that it would be kind of dumb to spread across the solar system just making the other planets just as messed up as what we are currently doing on Earth.