When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters
Russian influence operations on Twitter in the 2016 presidential election reached relatively few users, most of whom were highly partisan Republicans, and the Russian accounts had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior, according to a study out this morning.
The study, which the New York University Center for Social Media and Politics helmed, explores the limits of what Russian disinformation and misinformation was able to achieve on one major social media platform in the 2016 elections.
“My personal sense coming out of this is that this got way overhyped,” Josh Tucker, one of the report’s authors who is also the co-director of the New York University center, told me about the meaningfulness of the Russian tweets.
“Now we’re looking back at data and we can see how concentrated this was in one small portion of the population, and how the fact that people who were being exposed to these were really, really likely to vote for Trump,” Tucker said. “And then we have this data to show we can’t find any relationship between being exposed to these tweets and people’s change in attitudes.”
The U.S. Department of Energy has rejected the first batch of bids from oil companies to resupply a small amount of oil to the nation’s emergency crude oil stockpile in February, according to a DOE spokesperson.
“DOE will only select bids that meet the required crude specifications and that are at a price that is a good deal for taxpayers,” the spokesperson said.
The administration has said it wants to repurchase the oil at around $70 a barrel.
Member how the left raked trump over the coals for wanting to refill at $35? Member how he was trying to support the economy with siad purchase? Member how the price of oil then went negative? Member how many jobs were lost because of that? (mine included but for the better but that's another story) Member how Trump said it was a yuge mistake?
makes sense. i put up a huge fence between my direct neighbors and planted a tree in front of their side window and now i never hear/see them since, and it's been wonderful.
this is her pretending to mow the lawn passive aggressively, when we planted it, as she used to do literally every single time I was ever outside.
this is her yelling at the surveyor when i was getting the fence:
they were not happy losing land they were trying to steal from us. they even tried to get the HOA to deny our fence -- saying it would cause flooding in their yard. lol.
Karens have no ethnicity. They exist everywhere and annoy everyone.
You lost me at "HOA". I thought you enjoyed freedom.
I also enjoy a really nice house in a really nice neighborhood with zero crime and live in an area with plethora jobs and whose only nice dining option is not the olive garden....
There are two sets of rules for Democrats and Republicans, just like how Republicans are the story when they screw up, and how Republicans respond to Democrats are the story when Democrats screw up.
It would obviously not pass the Senate, nor be signed off on by the President.
The only purpose which bills such as this have is to be defeated, so that whichever party sponsored the bill can then say "We tried to lower your tax burden, but Evil Other Party wouldn't allow it!"
But I actually took a minute to think about the ramifications of this, and for me, personally, it would have a negative consequence.
I have already paid income tax on most of the wealth which I have accumulated over the past couple of decades. Some of it I haven't paid tax on, as it's in tax-deferred accounts.
I'm planning to work for maybe another ten years at max, and then retire.
Something like this, if signed today, would take a few years to go into effect. By that time, I will have paid income tax on close to 30 years worth of income. Then, when I retire and start spending that accumulated wealth, rather than benefitting from now being in a much lower income tax bracket (close to zero), I will instead start paying federal consumption taxes yet again, on the money which was already taxed on the way in.
I cannot think of a clean way for the Fed to avoid such a situation. Especially since the concept of actually saving money in Scrooge-Mc-Duck-fashion seems to be utterly foreign to a majority of Americans (and roughly the entirety of the Federal government.)
A guy can dream can't he. Thinking about it, if take a decent hit too, not as bad as you I'm sure. Don't care I want the income tax to die.
I think Ted Cruz wanted to end the IRS and start a flat tax. As with anything the government touches, there would be carve-outs for crotchety retirees like Joe, such as tax-free denture cream and essential foods, like prunes.
It would obviously not pass the Senate, nor be signed off on by the President.
The only purpose which bills such as this have is to be defeated, so that whichever party sponsored the bill can then say "We tried to lower your tax burden, but Evil Other Party wouldn't allow it!"
But I actually took a minute to think about the ramifications of this, and for me, personally, it would have a negative consequence.
I have already paid income tax on most of the wealth which I have accumulated over the past couple of decades. Some of it I haven't paid tax on, as it's in tax-deferred accounts.
I'm planning to work for maybe another ten years at max, and then retire.
Something like this, if signed today, would take a few years to go into effect. By that time, I will have paid income tax on close to 30 years worth of income. Then, when I retire and start spending that accumulated wealth, rather than benefitting from now being in a much lower income tax bracket (close to zero), I will instead start paying federal consumption taxes yet again, on the money which was already taxed on the way in.
I cannot think of a clean way for the Fed to avoid such a situation. Especially since the concept of actually saving money in Scrooge-Mc-Duck-fashion seems to be utterly foreign to a majority of Americans (and roughly the entirety of the Federal government.)
point 1: see the "affordable" care act from 2010 onwards, then in 2017 when they had the power to do it they choked on dicks instead. RINOS have a special place in hell reserved for them.
Point 2: Interesting take, I never considered that edge case. If the program included pre-bates as most serious proposals do, would that be enough to win your support?
point 1: see the "affordable" care act from 2010 onwards, then in 2017 when they had the power to do it they choked on dicks instead. RINOS have a special place in hell reserved for them.
They (all of congress, regardless of what party they claim to be affiliated with) are doing exactly what we the people elected them to do: be politicians.
If the fact that they are acting in their own self-interest, grandstanding, and generally not representing the best interests of the American people comes as a surprise to anyone, that's indicative of a need to have more realistic expectations.
Originally Posted by golftdibrad
Point 2: Interesting take, I never considered that edge case. If the program included pre-bates as most serious proposals do, would that be enough to win your support?
While I cannot think of a sound way to implement such a compensation, then yes, I would absolutely support abolishing the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax.
However, I would support abolishing the income tax and replacing it with nothing even more.
The US Government does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. Simply altering the manner in which they forcibly take money from the population does not address the root issue.
However, I would support abolishing the income tax and replacing it with nothing even more.
The US Government does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. Simply altering the manner in which they forcibly take money from the population does not address the root issue.
This is practically a Ron Paul quote, I love that man.
01-09-2023, 10:58 AM
0
