The birth rate is going to crater, because no one wants to bring children into a fascist shithole.
In February, he said the government could “monetize the US balance sheet for the American people.”
One way to do this would be to revalue America’s gold reserves.
The US still prices its gold reserves at $42.22 an ounce.
If revalued to the market price of around $2,900, it could create nearly $900 billion in new equity overnight.
This would give the government a new pool of capital without borrowing more money or printing dollars.
Other assets, including federal land, real estate, infrastructure, and even confiscated cryptocurrency, could also be used.
The logic is clear: the US owns trillions in untapped assets but still runs massive deficits.
They want to put federal land up as collateral for loans. Instead of just issuing debt in the government's name, they want to get lower interest rates by putting up US land as collateral. And when they manage the government right into default, the bankers will take possession of all national parks and federal land. That's what 'monetize' means. It means put up as collateral.
I suppose it is big enough for that...
You should see my Hello Kitty bandsaw.
Seems likely. The most rigid materially known, (or at least theorized) is nuclear pasta.. Nuclear pasta only forms inside neutron stars, stellar objects that are the last stage of matter before matter gives up entirely and collapses into a black hole.
...Says the talking sex doll masquerading as a reporter.
It would work, but only in the impossible world where you have a perfectly rigid unbreakable stick. But such an object cannot exist in this universe.
Pick up a solid rigid object near you. Anything will do, a coffee cup, a comb, a water bottle, anything. Pick it up from the top and lift it vertically. Observe it.
It seems as though the whole object moves instantaneously, does it not? It seems that the bottom of the object starts moving at the exact same instant as the top. But it is actually not the case. Every material has a certain elasticity to it. Everything deforms slightly under the tiniest of forces. Even a solid titanium rod deforms a little bit from the weight of a feather placed upon it. And this lack of perfect rigidity means that there is a very, very slight delay from when you start lifting the top of the object to when the bottom of it starts moving.
For small objects that you can manipulate with your hands, this delay is imperceptible to your senses. But if you observed an object being lifted with very precise scientific equipment, you could actually measure this delay. Motion can only transfer through objects at a finite speed. Specifically, it can only move at the speed of sound through the material. Your perfectly rigid object would have an infinite speed of sound within it. So yes, it would instantly transfer that motion. But with any real material, the delay wouldn't just be noticeable, but comically large.
Imagine this stick were made of steel. The speed of sound in steel is about 5120 m/s. The distance to the Moon is about 400,000 km. Converting and dividing shows that it would actually take about 22 hours for a pulse like that to travel through a steel pole that long. (Ignoring how the steel pole would be supported.)
So in fact, you are both right and wrong. You are correct for the object you describe. A perfectly rigid object would be usable as a tool of FTL communication. But such an object simply cannot exist in this universe.
Can you promote a pawn to a pawn going in the opposite direction, a lateral promotion?
It's part of the common law tradition though. Could it not be brought back?
Doomscrolling will doom us all. Fatalism is fatal. Rage against the dying of the light. Start building community, or start building bombs. Those are your choices.
The president is also openly corrupt, by orders of magnitude more. That crypto scheme for one is just a blatantly obvious bribery mechanism. Sure, the justices serve for life. But if a president is willing to directly violate explicit court orders, he could easily decide not to leave office as well. He could issue an executive order saying, "in my opinion, the two-term limit doesn't apply because
<bullshit reasons.>
And then when the court rules against him, just ignore their ruling. A lawless president is a president for life.Ultimately, philosophically, I don't see why a president that openly defies the law should enjoy the protections of the law. Want to be lawless? Then you can be an outlaw. Those who live by the sword should die by the sword.
Maybe not in terms of criminal accountability. But again, the court has ruled against Trump numerous times. The idea they blindly support everything he does is pure fiction. In his first term, they ruled against him many times.
They would have checks and balances. They could still be removed by impeachment. Members of the court would still have to be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Couldn't the same be said for impeachment and conviction in the Senate? If Congress can simply remove a president they don't like, how does this not end up making kingmakers like the Praetorian Guard of ancient Rome?
The court has ruled against Trump on numerous occasions. The idea they blindly support everything he does is simply not backed up by reality.
Did they rule that he has broad immunity? Yes. But ultimately they ruled it in a way that puts them as the arbiter of which acts have said immunity.
Could the Supreme Court use a Writ of Outlawry to Rein in a Rogue President?
There is much speculation on whether President Trump will simply refuse to comply with judicial orders. There's the famous line of Andrew Jackson, "The court has made their ruling, let them enforce it." JD Vance recently tweeted that he does not believe Musk's rogue DOGE agency should be subject to judicial review. The writer behind a lot of the philosophy of Trump and Vance, Curtis Yarvin, advocates that the president should simply ignore court orders and do what he wills. Many have lamented that if this were the case, that there is nothing the Supreme Court could do. That they would simply be powerless, and that the only hope would be that the military would step in.
But I can think of an option for such a scenario that I haven't heard discussed anywhere. If a president openly defies a direct order by a Supreme Court, could the court then call upon the ancient common law tradition of a Writ of Outlawry?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw
In common parlance, we use the term "out
Is it possible for a US citizen to open up a bank account in a foreign country and transfer money to it from within the US?
With all the chaos in Washington right now, I'm low key worried about Musk and his goons managing to fuck up the FDIC. If that happens, we're looking at simultaneous bank runs on every bank in the country.
Is it possible for a US citizen, without actually traveling to a foreign country, to open up a bank account in Canada or Europe somewhere and transfer some funds there? I'm not quite at the point of "liquidate everything and get it out of the country." But having a hedge in the form of an emergency fund in a Canadian or European bank account is very tempting right now.
Is this sort of thing possible? Can you open up a foreign bank account remotely? Or is this the kind of thing you can only do by physically traveling to a foreign country, walking into a bank branch, and opening an account there? And can you open up a bank account in a country without having any citizenship or residency there?
Basically, is it possible for a US citizen, whose only nationality or immigration statu
Yes. He has literally committed a capital offense. He could literally hang for this.
You will end up paying the share of taxes to your state government that you currently do to the federal government. If the federal government collapses, all 50 states are now de facto independent. Those states can now start forming a new country or new collection of countries as they will.
The Planet of the Apes film franchise has single-handedly shaped entire fields of biological research.
The Planet of the Apes film franchise has single-handedly shaped entire fields of biological research. As long as it remains in the public consciousness, no biologist or geneticist will ever experiment with trying to engineer chimps and other apes to be more intelligent. Any research proposal remotely related to the topic will be immediately shot down by someone simply stating, "do you want Planet of the Apes? Because this is how you get Planet of the Apes!"