Rob's House

Unless she has a compromised immune system she should be fine. Hope she feels better soon.

Are you barred from buying broad market index funds?

I think we should tell the sick & elderly to seclude themselves and let everyone else get back to work. Most elderly people don't work & can more easily quarantine themselves for weeks or months with little loss to the economy. With all the resources being dedicated/lost to this we could easily make accommodations for those who need assistance. For the rest of us, some reasonable caution and social distance is sufficient. And if we do get the slant eyed sickness we'll just have to suck it up and deal with having flu like symptoms for a couple of weeks. In the meantime, I'm happy to raid the stock market while the villagers cower in the cellar.

We would miss you.

Where do you see the market going over the next few weeks?

Obama would have developed a test that gives results in 7 hours.

I took my wife with me and told her how to vote. That's what I call making good use of the the 19th amendment .

I just voted for Joe Biden. Twice.

He was a Democrat shill, but was still just a little too reasonable for MSNBC.

It's actually a really stupid point. Does anyone honestly think Pence is using his own medical judgment rather than heading up a team of experts. These dipshits politicize everything.

Adam Carolla

Dyson swarm?

It does seem odd that those who spend 4 years in left-wing indoctrination centers are more likely to identify as left-wingers.

WRT the welfare state, the issue is form rather than robustness. WRT automation, if you're interested in the topic I would recommend checking this video out. It's not exactly the main subject discussed but the example illustrates the point very well. The whole video is worth watching but 9:25-15:20 is the most relevant portion.

There are a few points there so I'll take them in order. The fact that resources are arguably finite does not mean goods and services are finite or anywhere near capacity. In the 1850s Marx thought humanity had reached its technological peak and we needed to focus on more equitable distribution of the finite resources in existence. Production of goods and services increases every day. As to upward mobility, I believe those numbers are misleading as they ignore what causes some poor people to remain poor. Our welfare state largely encourages and enables people born into it to remain in it. Also, there are cultural considerations in play that cannot be explained by lack of opportunity. I'll use the real life example of a guy I'll call Joe to illustrate this. Joe and his older sister are less than 2 years apart in age & were both born into a relatively poor household. Joe's sister aspired to have a better life and now has a decent job, a nice family with a husband and children, and lives in a nice house in the suburbs. Joe aspired to thug life. He was given multiple opportunities across many years to learn a trade and make a decent living. He squandered every opportunity opting instead to work dead end jobs and sell drugs. Joe lives in a ***** apartment in a ***** neighborhood with his other sister, who could be an RN but settled for an LPN, & has a stagnant career because she's irresponsible and can't hold a job. They both have illegitimate children, no savings, and no prospects for improving their SES. On paper they are the people who have been denied upward mobility, but the issue isn't lack of opportunity, but rather unwillingness to answer the door when opportunity knocks. These are the majority of poor who remain poor. Most people see their incomes grow as they get older and develop marketable skills. Age is the greatest demographic indicator of income. A high % of people in the lower brackets are in their 20s.

This is pretty far removed from what I was asking, but that's fine. I personally oppose such tax hikes due largely to the broader effect they have on the economy, but I wouldn't freak out about a moderate hike in the top marginal tax rate. A drastic hike, however, would give me great concern. What I was getting at is the idea that people at the top making lots of money causes people in lower brackets to have less. I'm not sure that you're taking that position, but many do, & as far as I can tell it's a baseless theory.

The real question is WHY is it a problem. It seems the underlying implication is that those who are struggling would have more if those at the top made less. I'm curious if that's your reasoning?

I'm curious why people making ridiculous money concerns you. It concerns me too, despite my economic libertarian leanings, but for what I imagine are entirely different reasons. I'm actually not so concerned about billionaires as I am concentration of power by multi-national corporations. What threat do you see in rich CEOs and the like?

It's not overblown at all. It's who the guy is and has been throughout his career. It's the one thing he's been amazingly consistent about. This idea that he's just a run of the mill Democrat who uses the word socialism a little too freely doesn't have any evidence to support it. Now, if you're suggesting that he wouldn't be able to implement the radical changes he supports, then I agree with you. But it would not be for a lack of trying.

How gentle is the rain that falls softly on the meadow Birds high up in the trees serenade the clouds with their melodies Oh see, there beyond the hill the bright colors of the rainbow some magic from above made this day for us just to fall in love

My old friend lives up in the mountains He flew up there to paint the world He says, even though interpretation's what I count on, this little picture to me seems blurred Hard lines and the shadows come easy I see it all just as clear as a bell I just can't seem to set my easel to please me I paint my heaven but it looks like hell

If I could get a hold of Ivanka we'd have much more pressing matters to discuss.

Norman played very well in a system similar to the one we run, but Dan the Fan & Bruce Allen don't understand concepts like scheme fit. They just saw "good CB" and backed up the Brinks truck for a zone corner only to play him in a man heavy coverage scheme. He didn't suck, but he didn't play up to the level of his contract because he was never that kind of player in the first place. Carolina thought enough of him to tag him while trying to re-sign him but pulled the tag when it became clear he wasn't going to what they thought he was worth. No one was more surprised than Norman when the Redskins offered to make him the highest paid CB in the league. Put back in a scheme that better utilizes his skill set, and at a more reasonable price, he could be a valuable acquisition.