yarr

As most people know, there's a heavy police and national guard presence in DC. However, as far as I know, they are just booting people out of DC, not making them disappear.

It stands to reason when the police and national guard presence goes back to its old level that many of the people will just come back, since we haven't resolved any of the underlying problems that led to all the crime and homelessness.

Keeping all those people posted up costs a lot of money. I would say unless the plan is to have the military permanently occupy every major US city, that we are wasting our time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of crime or homelessness, but this just seems like a temporary way to move the problem around at great expense, not to solve it.

Am I missing something here?

It's become somewhat of a meme now when there is a story on crime, or other bad things happening in a city, people pipe up and say "That's how it is in blue cities!" "This could only happen in a Democrat city!" However, I noticed they never say "... and that's why only want to live in X" or "... that would never happen in Y".

If living in "blue cities" are such a nightmare, where are all these Utopian "red cities" that people are apparently in favor of?

I realize there's no singular answer for this, but many of the MAGA crowd attribute many of our current woes to the prior administration, like cost of living, inflation, unemployment rates, etc.

I'd imagine that every day that passes and we get more and more distant from Biden's presidency, it gets a bit harder to blame him for every problem.

e.g. It'd be hard to blame many of the increased prices on electronics on him, since much of this has been driven by Trump's tariffs (but I bet someone will attempt to refute this!)

This is a long-winded way of me asking the community, have you seen any Trump fans start to come around at all? When do we start living in the conditions (good or bad) of Trump's America and stop laying blame on the last administration?

I'm interested to see what people of all persuasions feel about this.

For myself, I have seen some minor loss of enthusiasm among Trump followers, but I haven't seen anyone register as a Democrat yet :)

I was talking to one of my friends and he mentioned staying home on July 4, citing how there are a lot of really ugly things going on in the US.

After thinking about this myself, I'm starting to feel the same way. Instead of being proud of the country, I'm feeling like I'm just another wallet that companies and the government are trying to suck all the money out of.

The cost of living is going up, the housing market is a nightmare, I don't feel very confident in our government at all, the job market is a nightmare...

I think I'll be staying home this year too... anyone else?

JP recently appeared on "Jubilee", the YouTube channel known for having "debate-ish" videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwk5MPE_6zE

The setup here is they will take some person and surround them with tens of their opponents, so you have "Jordan Peterson vs 20 Atheists".

In this exact video, one of the people asks JP if he's a Christian and he replies "Don't be a smartass!"

I haven't seen someone that espouses so many Christian values and philosophy while trying to hold it at arm's length. Is this just part of the usual JP tactic where you call into question any terms used in a discussion to sound deeply philosophical?

He seems to have an atypical relationship with Christianity and I can't decide if that's some genuine crisis he has OR if he just pretends to hold this stance just to add one more slippery facet to his behavior.

If nothing else, it's very odd.

Another "win" for the tariffs... Good luck blaming this one on Biden!

https://www.wtrf.com/news/devastating-blow-ohio-company-will-no-longer-develop-transformer-production-plant-in-the-ohio-valley-that-was-bringing-in-over-600-jobs/

WEIRTON, W.Va. (WTRF) — The future of the proposed transformer manufacturing facility in Weirton is facing uncertainty after union leaders learned that the project is facing major challenges.

Earlier this week, union leaders with the United Steelworkers say they met with company officials with Cleveland-Cliffs to talk about plans for the transformer facility in Weirton.

What they thought was going to be a meeting to discuss bringing back workers to the idle mill turned into unexpected news of an indefinite delay for the project.

United Steelworkers staff representative John Saunders says the reason for the pause in plans is because of financial issues and the uncertainty surrounding tariffs.

He says the change in plans leaves a lot of questions about what’s next.

It was unexpected and devastating; we thought we had the potential to bring back 600 people at Weirton over a period of time, and then we find out it’s indefinitely delayed, so that’s a really tough setback.”

John Saunders – District 1, Staff Representative for United Steelworkers The decision coincided with Cleveland-Cliffs’ release of its first-quarter 2025 results, in which the company announced it would no longer deploy capital toward the Weirton transformer plant.

The phenomenon of sovereign citizens persistently trying to win court cases with their principles, despite a lack of success, is indeed puzzling. On YouTube alone, there are around 5,000 videos showing sovereign citizens facing defeat in the courtroom. These individuals often make claims that have yet to prove successful and frequently end up incarcerated.

Why do people continue to adopt this seemingly futile approach? It's akin to watching 5,000 parachutists attempt a failed jump from the Eiffel Tower, only for newcomers to keep trying despite knowing, or perhaps ignoring, the inevitable outcome. Despite the growing pile of mangled bodies at the base of the tower, every day people decide to climb up and try for themselves.

The dedication of these individuals is noteworthy; they invest a great deal of time mastering the intricacies of their "sovereign" defense. Yet, it seems that they dedicate little time to researching previous legal outcomes or understanding why their arguments haven't held up in court historically.

What drives this persistence? Is it a deep-seated belief system that overrides rational analysis, or is there another factor at play that encourages them to keep going despite overwhelming evidence of failure?

I’ve been reading up on the tariffs that were imposed during the Trump administration and I keep seeing mixed reviews about their effectiveness. On one hand, they seemed to protect certain domestic industries by making imported goods more expensive; on the other hand, there’s a lot of talk about higher prices for consumers and retaliatory measures from trading partners.

The thing is, these tariffs aren’t exactly popular among everyone. If we were to look back 1 year out, 2 years out, and even a few more years down the line, how will we actually know if this was a good move?

Surely there are some metrics or outcomes that can help us evaluate their success or failure. I guess it's not as simple as checking stock market performance alone, although that’s probably part of it, right?

Is it primarily about looking at changes in trade balances with countries like China, or do we need to consider the broader economic impacts, such as job growth within certain industries? And how much weight should be given to the political ramifications, like strengthened relationships (or tensions) with trading partners?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what metrics or indicators would help determine whether these tariffs were indeed a beneficial strategy. Thanks in advance for any insights!

Back in 1970, Alvin Toffler wrote Future Shock, where he introduced the idea that too much rapid change could leave people feeling overwhelmed, stressed, and disconnected. He called it "future shock" — and honestly, reading it today feels almost eerie with how accurate he was.

Toffler believed we were moving from an industrial society to a "super-industrial" one, where everything would change faster than people could handle. The book was a huge hit at the time, selling over six million copies, but what's crazy is how much of what he talked about feels even more true in 2025. Some examples:

• Disposable culture: He predicted throwaway products, and now we have single-use plastics, fast fashion, and gadgets that feel obsolete within a year.

• Tech burnout: Toffler said technology would become outdated faster and faster. Today, if you don’t upgrade your phone or update your software, you feel left behind.

• Rent instead of own: Services like Airbnb and Uber fit his prediction that we’d move away from owning things and toward renting everything.

• Job instability: He nailed the rise of the gig economy, freelancing, and how fast-changing industries make it hard to stay trained up and secure.

• Transient relationships: He warned about shallow, fleeting social connections — something social media, dating apps, and global mobility have absolutely amplified.

• Information overload: This term literally came from Future Shock, and if you've ever felt exhausted just from scrolling through your feeds or reading the news, you know exactly what he meant.

Toffler also talked about the "death of permanence" — not just products, but relationships, jobs, even identities becoming temporary and interchangeable. He warned it would cause "shattering stress and disorientation." Looking around at the rising rates of anxiety, depression, and burnout today, it’s hard not to see what he meant.

I think about this book a lot when I read about some of the sick things happening today. Is this a warped perspective?

For those of you that haven't seen, 4chan was hacked:

https://boingboing.net/2025/04/17/4chan-hacked-obliterated-and-unlikely-to-be-back-soon.html

A deadly blow? Will a copycat spring up? Where are the users going in the meantime? Does any of this really matter?

With all the talk of tariffs, I've seen more or less this argument:

"Once the tariffs go in place, companies will start manufacturing in the USA and that's good thing."

However, when I think about being able to manufacture something like a laptop computer, or a car, these are both operations that require a lot of things:

1. the input components to build the thing
2. skilled labor that can manufacture the thing
3. supply-chains that are in place from initial build all the way to retail

The premise seems to be: "OK, tariffs go in, someone INSTANTLY sets up a company that manufactures X, then USA wins".

However, for someone to want to take the "bet" on setting up a really expensive factory, they'd have to believe that the tariff will be in place a long time, because if it is NOT... then they have made a terrible investment and the new factory will be instantly non-viable.

Am I crazy? Am I missing something? I understand that it would be great if we had domestic manufacturing but it seems like the people that are behind tariffs think you just snap your fingers and there is a factory cranking out laptops, when in my understanding this is a process that requires a huge amount of money and time.

My thinking is that the amount of people / companies in the USA that have enough capital to start up a manufacturing company like this want to make sure it's a relatively safe bet before pulling the trigger, and if past tariff behavior from Mr. Trump is any indication, we can't count on these tariffs being present for a long time.

I'm baffled by this whole Crisco/shortening candle-in-contraptions meme circulating around. You've got folks shoving these things in everything from copper pots to elaborate sand enclosures, claiming superior heat output and somehow making a case for off-grid energy.

Let's unpack the physics, because frankly, it doesn't add up:

Combustion 101: A candle (or our Crisco-fied iteration) works by burning the fuel source (fat in this case), releasing heat and light through a chemical reaction with oxygen. The material surrounding it doesn't inherently influence this combustion process. Copper, terracotta, or sand won't magically accelerate the burning rate or somehow trap more heat.

Radiation & Conduction: Sure, these materials might hold and radiate a BIT more heat absorbed from the flame compared to open air. But the difference is negligible. Convection (hot air rising) is the primary heat transfer mechanism, and the enclosure doesn't significantly enhance it.

Scaling Up Fallacy: If this contraption truly held the key to efficient off-grid heating, wouldn't we be ditching fuel oil and natural gas entirely? Imagine a skyscraper-sized Crisco candle in a cosmic copper pot - it wouldn't magically solve our energy needs. The heat output wouldn't scale proportionally due to limitations in combustion itself.

In short -- why are people so fascinated with this? A simple test will show that it is not more effective than a simple candle, yet people seem to be continually fascinated by it.