All Activity

Greatest goal song ever …

Maybe we could invade? What do you think about the new articles published linking him to ms13?

Oh, yes it can. It does it all the time through its control of the world financial system. That theater in the White House was orchestrated by Trump. The funniest punchline was when a guy who calls himself a charismatic dictator said he had no power to return him. And he did it with a straight face.

The us gov can’t compel the pres of another country to return someone to the us. So what is there to be done?

I don't know what it is, I just know it is 12 long per Casey Cunningham's email today.

Ok. List it?

Maybe ask ChatGPT what it thinks of defying the Supreme Court. And ask it what it thinks of the head of the department of education not knowing what it is.

No, it is a long list.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/16/us-news/alleged-ms-13-gangbanger-kilmar-abrego-garcias-rank-street-name-revealed-as-fight-over-deportation-to-el-salvador-mega-prison-rages-docs/ Chele is his gang name

What will be the impact of the new China-US trade war? It is a mistake to think of this as a US-China trade war. It is much more generalised than that. In the past five or six years, dozens of countries have imposed tariffs or other trade constraints, and we will see a lot more of this until trade imbalances are finally resolved. The current trade conflict has been inevitable for years, and I wrote about this in my 2013 book, The Great Rebalancing. Joan Robinson, one of the best economists on trade, argued way back in the 1930s that in a globalised system, when a group of countries start running large, persistent surpluses, it's just a question of time before their trade partners begin to retaliate, which is when trade conflict becomes generalised. They retaliate because trade surpluses are usually created by policies that increase a country's global competitiveness while repressing domestic demand. By running trade surpluses, these countries force the cost of weak domestic demand onto their trade partners. At some point, however, Robinson argued that the trade partners would no longer be willing or able to bear the cost, which typically comes in the form of either higher unemployment or high household or fiscal debt, so they would retaliate with their own trade policies. At the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, Keynes made the same argument, which is why he proposed a global trading system that penalised countries that ran persistent surpluses. He argued that trade and industrial policies that resulted in persistent trade surpluses put downward pressure on global demand, and this downward pressure would lead to rising unemployment and rising debt. This seems to describe the world of the past four or five decades very well, and in my 2019 book (Trade Wars are Class Wars) I showed how it also was likely to worsen income inequality. The trade conflict we are undergoing, in other words, may represent a major shift in the structure of the global economy - along with a shift in the way we think about economics - a lot like what we saw in the 1970s or in the 1930s. If that is the case, it means that we are in the midst of a major shift in the structure of the global economy. Our previous experiences in the 1930s and the 1970s suggest that we won't be able to predict what kind of world will emerge in the next decade or so, but we can be very sure that it will be very different from the world of the past several decades. The key for the success of most countries is how quickly they can adjust to the change in conditions. If they can adjust sustainably, they will emerge from this process in relatively good shape. If not, they will find it very difficult. Will trade and supply chains become more regionalised? What will the US' role be in globalisation? They probably will, at least in the near term. We live in a world with historically unprecedented levels of trade imbalances, and these are neither normal nor sustainable. In a well-functioning global trading system, countries export to pay for imports, and by specialisation, this increases global output. In our world, many countries export to pass on the costs of weak domestic demand. Trade conflict means that we are returning to a world with smaller imbalances and less subsidising of supply chains, which may mean less trade. One of the key changes will be a change in the global role of the US dollar. There have been many discussions about which currency could replace the US dollar as the global reserve currency if it no longer holds that position, which is a stupid question. At no time in history has any currency played the role of the US dollar - this is a complete anomaly and it's unsustainable. If the US dollar reduces its role in global trade - and I hope that happens relatively quickly - it will not be replaced. It is far more likely that we move to a world of multiple trading currencies. We keep forgetting what we used to know very well - that in a globalised world, every country must choose between more global integration or more control of its domestic economy. A fully integrated global economy can only succeed if all nations retain open trade and capital accounts and refrain from domestic industrial policies that affect the external account. But if several major economies opt for more control of their domestic economies, and implement policies that lead to large, persistent external imbalances, they force their more open trade partners to absorb those imbalances by changing the structure of their own economies. A country like Brazil, for example, wants to expand its manufacturing sector and reduce its dependence on commodity exports, but given its role in the global trading system, it has seen the opposite happen. These problems have been building through the 1990s and 2000s, but as the consequences of these imbalances have got worse, many countries in the world that once supported globalisation have now decided that they want to regain control of their domestic economies. This means less open trade and capital accounts, whether this comes in the form of tariffs or other kinds of policies. The role of the US here is particularly important. Since the 1980s, the US chose to play a role - partly for Cold War geopolitical reasons, and partly for the benefit of Wall Street - where it was going to accommodate the imbalances of the rest of the world by leaving its capital account completely open to the needs of countries to acquire foreign assets to balance their surpluses. The result was half of the excess savings in the world being absorbed by the US for decades, with half of the rest being absorbed by the UK, Canada and Australia, whose financial markets are very similar to that of the US. Of course the flip side of capital inflows is the trade deficit, which is why the US role as global consumer of last resort is simply the flip side of its role of absorber of last resort of excess global savings. If the US (along with the UK, Canada and Australia) now decide that they are unable or unwilling to continue playing this role, the consequences for global trade are enormous. If the countries accounting for most of the global deficits refuse to continue running deficits, either the surpluses of the large surplus countries collapse or the deficits of the rest of the world explode, or both. Either reaction will be terribly painful.

But but but he’s a father

So she is now admitting to perjury in order to gain release of her gangster husband. Beautiful couple.

That's great (seriously) but most wingers don't. Are you a winger btw?

I said churches should be taxed boss. Read above.

The hypocrisy of the right is funny. They constantly whine about universities being liberal but NEVER complain about (tax exempt) churches being winger.

Her statement comes after the DHS posted documents from 2021 indicating that she filed for a protective order claiming her husband punched and scratched her, ripped her shirt and left her bruised. sounds like a crime to me? what say you ChatGPT ? Yes the described actions would likely constitute a crime in the United States. Specifically, they would fall under the category of domestic violence, which is illegal in every U.S. state. Here’s a breakdown of potential charges: 1. Assault and Battery Punching and scratching someone typically qualifies as assault (the threat or attempt of physical harm) and battery (the actual physical harm). These can be charged as misdemeanors or felonies, depending on the severity and state laws. 2. Domestic Violence Since this involves a spouse, it likely qualifies as domestic battery or domestic assault, which can carry enhanced penalties due to the relationship between the parties. 3. Destruction of Property Ripping a shirt could be considered destruction of personal property, especially if it was done violently or intentionally as part of the altercation. 4. Resulting Injuries Leaving someone bruised indicates physical harm, which strengthens the case for assault/battery charges and may also factor into protective order proceedings. Even if charges weren’t filed at the time, statements like these in legal documents (like a protective order) can be the basis for investigation or later prosecution, especially if new evidence or reports emerge. Would you like info on how different states treat domestic violence or how protective orders work?

Is there a short list of psu wrestlers that intended to wrestle that specific season try to qualify for worlds?

The chaw and bud heavy for willie is great

They argued earlier in the year. They (psu fans) that growing the sport was wrestling that tomato can early season schedule. So it is just them being them.

https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-abrego-garcias-wife-responds-after-restraining-order-revealed-2060718 Sounds like he’s a wife beater

Interesting Hodge year and overall. This was the year Oklahoma St was on probation. You wrestle against the guys who are put in front of you in the post season but if the Cowboys are there some of this changes.

Doesn't refute my claim that US can't single handedly beat China in a trade war. In fact it doesn't appear to discuss the trade war at all. Looks like another strawman by you.

Maybe hate is the wrong word. But certainly a lot of putting down the event or making it seem if PSU isn’t there that it’s not worth having. That’s the sentiment I get in my circles.