yestrusocialist
No bio...
User ID: 2545
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
HELOCs are a thing that let you turn home equity into actual cash.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
If a typical American believes their eyes over the economists and focuses on housing, they will view inflation as being close to zero.
Typical situation: not moving this year.
If you aren't moving, rent increases for lease renewals are generally much smaller than rent increases for new tenants. (See Zillow Rent index = asking rent for stuff on the market, vs CPI Rent which is what people who take a survey actually pay.) If you are a homeowner and have a mortgage the only thing that is going up is either home insurance or property tax (which often gets rolled in, i.e. my mortgage bill is actually principal + interest + escrow to cover property tax/home insurance), which is at most 1/3 of the total.
People see this, they feel trapped and frustrated by it
The illiquidity of the market is unfortunate. People made an interest rate bet and won a lot of money. Consider a mortgage with 25 years of $2000/month payments (principal+interest) - this was worth $446k to the bank at a 2.5% discount rate (i.e. 0% interest + 2.5% to cover default probability) but if the bank sold it today they'll get $284k (assuming 4.5% interest + 2.5% to cover default = 7%). The homeowner is richer by $162k in NPV!
But it is unfortunate that this $162k comes with a lot of hassle - namely they can only realize it slowly over time by holding onto a specific piece of real estate. A regulatory fix I'd propose: if a mortgage holder sells the loan the debtor gets a 30 day call option at the sale price + $1k.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
At least some of them have concrete - albeit quite small - policy proposals. An example is the "Idaho Project" which consists of getting the legal right to turn most of Idaho (i.e. all of it except Boise) into the white ethnostate. Idaho ex Boise is chosen because it is already like 97% white and 3% native American, and they don't seem to care much about the Native Americans.
I kind of support them. If they can turn Idaho into a white paradise, let them do it. I've never been to Idaho, I don't really have any plans to go, and don't see why anyone else should care either.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Sure, but that's the same as it always was.
This does of course assume that Assad has no problem taking the risk of Palestinians getting off the bus in Syria - everyone is happy with a bunch of Palestinians showing up, right?
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
The highest position on the progressive totem pole is being Jewish, not black or trans.
I don't think this is true. For example, when black nationalists (not sure how better to describe Black Hebrew Israelites) murder 5 Jews in a terrorist attack, progressive sources just leave the ethnicity/photo/motives of the perpetrator out.
https://archive.ph/VyNhJ https://archive.ph/hqN5U#selection-1714.3-1724.0
When there is an increase in antisemitic attacks, there's a distinct lack of curiosity as to who is doing them - at most a brief mention that it's (surprisingly!) not white nationalists.
https://archive.ph/zL1P1 https://archive.ph/XOjPZ
You need to look on social media to find out who actually did it: https://www.facebook.com/assemblymandovhikind/videos/1899927243445157/
I think this guy was just exceptionally dumb for doing it literally 1-2 days later.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
People who are skeptical of certain aspects and express that skepticism of the narrative (the beheaded babies) are screencapped and shared as 'the worst people'. Does this remind anyone of what happened to those who were simply skeptical of the narrative that American police were on some racist killing spree, and demanded to see harder evidence?
Can you link to this? I certainly haven't seen it. I have seen plenty of frog accounts expressing skepticism of the specific "beheading babies" narrative and basically no criticism of that skepticism. Of course most of the skepticism also comes with "what they filmed themselves doing is enough, kill them all regardless."
That's an important distinction between the current situation and BLM. Cops aren't going house by house, shooting old black ladies and rap music enjoyers, then posting videos of their deaths to their own facebook so their friends and relatives can watch. For the most part, bodycam footage shows Adam Toledo/Makia Bryant/Ricardo Munoz type situations of cops killing a criminal when interrupting a violent crime. So when you post bodycam footage and crime stats, you completely destroy the BLM narrative.
That's why the left attacks you for skepticism - it's all they can do. Making the case based on facts isn't really possible. In contrast, the right mostly attacks you for posting celebratory photos of Palestinian paragliders or saying that Israeli music enjoyers deserved it for being too close to Gaza.
https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/10/Screen-Shot-2023-10-10-at-81118-PM.jpg
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Suppose that Syria and Iraq allow buses to drive to Israel. The buses get to the fence, which you can see pictures of here:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-gunfire-from-syria-aimed-at-military-drone-operating-along-border/
Now what?
For comparison, Iran has 800 miles of coastline on the Persian Gulf which looks like this:
https://theculturetrip.com/middle-east/iran/articles/the-most-beautiful-beaches-in-iran
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Yes, the Arabs have done a great job. That's why virtually all the Jews in their countries fled or were expelled, and mostly wound up in Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhud
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956%E2%80%931957_exodus_and_expulsions_from_Egypt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Syria#Post-1948
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_of_Iranian_Jews
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Afghanistan#Anti-Jewish_campaign
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Realistically, the US/Israel are far better able to mount a logistical operation such as this than Iran is. Taking the $50B-ish of US aid to Ukraine and dividing by 2M Palestinians, that's $25k/person to spend. Can Iran throw $25B at the return trip?
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Israel can of course do the same thing that African migrants to Europe are doing: ensure that by the time the Palestinians are 11.9 miles from Iran, they are in boats capable of traveling only 30 miles (i.e. not enough to cross the gulf to reach Saudi Arabia).
The Iranians can shoot them out of the sea, let them land on the beach, or even render assistance.
Kind of strange how Europe is incapable of turning back migrants, but sending migrants to Iran is of course impossible.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
So massive genocide
It is possible that Iran commits genocide against the Palestinians. Quite a move, first steering them towards committing atrocities against Israel, then murder them all when they show up in need of help.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Greg Abbott is seeing success with his immigration policy because the people he’s bussing more or less by definition want to go somewhere
I already addressed this point. The Palestinians want to get on the boat and go to Iran because there's food in Iran, and none in Gaza.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Multiple trips are not realistic. I'm happy to explain why, but that shouldn't be necessary.
Please, explain.
Good luck with gaining access to Iranian ports.
Wow, so Europe can stop illegal immigrants from taking boats across the Mediterranean simply by refusing a port pass? Why haven't they thought of this?
The destination is rhetorical. Iran can perform the same maneuver at any port of their choosing.
This sounds like a problem for Iran and Saudi Arabia/the UAE/Oman/Pakistan (ports that are reasonably accessible to Iran) to work out amongst themselves. Pretty sure Israel can work out ways to stop a Suez crossing in the reverse direction if they need to.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
And then what does the world do? Send a strongly-worded letter? Sanction them? Maybe try to stop their nuclear program?
Just like the Palestinians, this isn't really Israel's problem anymore.
When you're relying on Iran to allow you to do things it doesn't want you to do on the basis of them being too squeamish to stop you, you know you've got a bad plan.
I'm not relying on this. Iran can murder all the Palestinians on camera as far as I'm concerned. It's a win for Israel and there's tons of footage of Persians murdering Arabs to broadcast to the Arab world. Arab/Persian conflict is a distraction from Arab/Jew conflict.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Moving the Palestinians would change a lot. First of all, they'd mostly be Iran's problem. If they remain prisoners in Iran-operated refugee camps, any human rights issues are the result of Persian rather than Israeli oppression. If they integrate into Iranian society, hopefully they find better things to do than become terrorists. Meanwhile the world loses a current talking point against Israel - maybe 10-20 years ago they did a forced migration, but that's ancient history. Netenyahu, the person with his name/face on the policy, is 74 today and will be dead soon.
Second, they'd be far away. No matter how terrible the Palestinians are, they aren't America's problem due to distance. To attack America they need to either get past airport security, take a boat, or something similar.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
I already mentioned the most extreme method needed to do this:
Maybe also Gaza is 100% blockaded and no food goes in, giving people an incentive to leave.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Against whom? The Palestiniains? Sure. They wanted a war, they got one.
Against Iran? It doesn't seem any more an act of war than Mexico or other nations cooperating with illegal immigration to the US.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Or you need 100 boats with 1000 person capacity if each one takes 10 trips. I'm shocked at your suggestion that the Palestinians are a bunch of terrorists, rather than innocent victims of Israeli oppression!
Who is paying for this, and in charge? Israel?
As I see it, Israel + USA.
Someone will have to take responsibility for the Iran destination, and that will prove quite contentious.
USA and Israel can certainly provide tons of Israeli/American flag branded food/water/etc, which Iran can distribute as they see fit.
Someone will have to take responsibility for the Iran destination, and that will prove quite contentious. Iran can reasonably blockade and/or refuse port.
Yes, Iran certainly does have the ability to shoot guns at boats full of Palestinian refugees while the cameras broadcast videos of innocent women and children dying to the world. How is showing Iran to be bloodthirsty killers of Arabs and getting rid of Palestinians not a huge win for Israel?
Iran could commandeer the ships and park them at the Port Authority of NY/NJ.
Getting from the Meditterranean to the Persian Gulf is a far simpler logistical problem than Persian Gulf to America, and Iran is far less capable of logistics than Israel or the US.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Here's my proposal for how to solve this, with a plan I am shamelessly stealing from Greg Abbot and Camp of the Saints.
Step 1, just start rounding up Palestinians and putting them on boats. Let them grab their possessions if they want to cooperate. These are nice, safe, clean boats with cameras everywhere to film all the food/medicine/clean water being provided. Maybe also Gaza is 100% blockaded and no food goes in, giving people an incentive to leave.
Step 2: the boats set sail to Iran. Egypt allows them to traverse Suez because...well keep reading.
Step 3: the unarmed boats full of refugees and cameras go directly to shore in Iran. They ignore warnings to stop. They let the Iranians inspect them for weapons. They land, tell everyone to get off, and repeat.
This puts Iran in the unenviable position of either a) having to martyr thousands of unarmed Palestinian refugees on camera or b) live with Palestinians. If Egypt doesn't let them through Suez, then Egypt can have the Palestinians.
What you guys think of this plan?
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
Again, the distinction they make is initiation of violence, which you seem to be trying hard to ignore.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
I'm confused. You seem to be trying to get from "union labor has allies willing to use violence" to "this is good" without advancing any argument why. Instead, you are just repeating truisms that no one disagrees with as if they make your case.
Your last sentence is an odd non-sequitur since free market types don't object to using violence against others who initiate violence.
yestrusocialist
1yr ago
My mistake, I thought you were attempting to make a statement more substantive than a purely descriptive "workers have lots of power due to threats of violence".
No one disputes that, so I'm not sure why you are devoting so much verbiage to repeating it.
Why vote to pay union dues for no benefit?
I was responding to this. They voted for unionization due to benefits they hoped to achieve for white workers, at the expense of black ones.
As noted in the article, the higher pay for black workers also reflects that Ford was greedy where others were racist.
That's the whole point of unionization - letting some workers get a great gig at the expense of others.
I suspect their memory is exaggerated. As a share of disposable personal income, food spending went from about 10% of income to 11% income from 2018 to 2022. Less if you don't eat out a lot.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=76967
More options
Context Copy link