I am pretty sure it's the source of the money that matters more (legal vs. illegal) than whether the accounting tricks are legally sound.

What you're saying sounds like "at least he wasn't a complete numb-nuts", but that's not much of an "at least" in this scenario.

I am pretty sure the courts will be looking for an "at least he wasn't stealing from his customers".

At least, that's the sane hope.

I am sure everyone has seen a shooting star. Planes don't move like shooting starts or whatever is in this vide.

I think it's safe to conclude that this is not a plane nor a meteor.

I believe that's what was meant by "fake". In other words, inauthentic.

As far as the transformation from "private institution" to central bank, are you suggesting that this was a form of Open Market Operations?

What I'm suggesting is that the official account makes no sense. Mary Lincoln Todd waits for Booth to do all of his theatrics, instead of immediately screaming "EVERYONE WITH A GUN SHOOT THAT MAN".

I am not suggesting it anything beyond that. But I am not terminally naïve.

I challenge you to look for good historical analysis of the situation. There isn't that much.

And as Booth is being a Marvel action hero (a man in his 40s), everyone is standing around twiddling their thumbs? Including the military detachment outside. The story is not realistic on any level.

If companies are "allowed" to lay people off, then why not this? I'm pretty sure this is within the boundaries of "at will employment". You'd have to show some kind of civil rights violation.

Companies don't have to show cause to fire anyone. That's a cover your ass situation. This ass-covering makes sense with more than half of the US population now falling into some kind of protected class.

Ironically, here in the United States, they have everyone distracted with race wars and gender ID while workers' rights are still nonexistent.

That's why corporations love Corporate Black History Month and Corporate LGBTQ Month so much. They get to virtue signal that they don't discriminate while continuing to rob everyone blind.

Pricing out poor fat people from restaurants will not solve the obesity epidemic. It will drive them to Doritos.

Not everybody eats restaurant food for entertainment. Sometimes you can't cook and a larger portion means leftovers and usually more calories per dollar.

There's nothing wrong with large portions. If you didn't want that much food, go to a different restaurant, or a buffet where you can select exactly how much food you want.

And what large portions are we talking about anyway? That peaked in the 90s just like your bug splattered windshields.

>> Economists such as Lord Adair Turner, the former chair of the British Financial Services Authority, have argued that innovation in the financial industry is often a form of rent-seeking.[24][25]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

Do they not teach this stuff in an undergraduate business classes any more? "Float" was BIZ101 and in BIZ102 you learn how to read financial statements...

The "genius restaurateur" in the article rediscovered the art of not paying your bills with a credit card, i.e., the "debt trap".

>> Raising capital to do a startup reduces skin in the game (you’re spending other people’s money, after all).

The more likely correct take is as follows. Note that I am changing just one word.

The right version:

>> Raising capital to do a startup INCREASES skin in the game (you’re spending other people’s money, after all).

The naïve take seems to place no value on reputation (ability to get more financing in the future).

People have been paying for live performances of music, i.e., "certain sounds", throughout all of recorded history. So it's the opposite of an aberration. "Paying to hear certain sounds" is a time-honored human tradition. If we broaden our definition of "paying" to include barter, I would guess it goes back to the invention of musical instruments.

You are totally missing the point. Having to rely upon central banks was the fundamental problem being solved.

> The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts.

-Satoshi Nakamoto [0]

Getting central banks out of the picture is original philosophical motivation for developing a digital currency. All of the "cashless society" convenience aspects are secondary features. Everything that follows, regarding ledgers/records/blockchain/double-spending/trust-less is what's needed to make a digital currency work without a centralized authorities that mint money and validate transactions.

> A lot of people automatically dismiss e-currency as a lost cause because of all the companies that failed since the 1990's. I hope it's obvious it was only the centrally controlled nature of those systems that doomed them. I think this is the first time we're trying a decentralized, non-trust-based system.

-Satoshi Nakamoto [1]

Next up, the irreversibility of transactions is a feature, not a bug.

> For many purposes, reversal and arbitration is highly desirable, but there is no way anyone can compete with the arbitration provided by Visa and Mastercard, for they have network effects on their side, and they do a really good job of arbitration, at which they have vast experience, accumulated skills, wisdom, and good repute. So any new networked transaction system has to target the demand for final and irreversible transactions. [2]

[0] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour...

[1] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour...

[2] https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/th...

I guess there are child support for males wrt to (b), which could very well incentivize the use of a male pill.

>> Right now the absolute worst thing you can do for the environment is to have a child as an African. [0]

Because today's African babies are tomorrow's European migrants, who will bolster the ranks of the polluting global elite.

But we don't want to go here do we?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d...

I do feel compelled to mention the following in regard to the comparison with Bush. The man, Cheney's puppet as he was, started an illegal war that killed a few hundred thousand people. Using the intelligence apparatus to manipulate Congress and the American people, in my view, is much worse than anything Trump had done. Same with enabling the domestic spying apparatus with the Patriot Act. If that's not undermining our institutions, I don't know what is.

I guess I should preempt the obvious counter argument about Trump's allegation that the election was stolen. The Democrats did the same exact thing with Russiagate. Both in terms of the accusation and pursuing it through legal channels, all based on fictional evidence to boot.

We should not allow us to miss the bigger picture while falling for the manufacrured distraction of "my party vs their party." But rather look to understand the special interests that are amplifying our division, and benefitting from it.