2024 Presidential Elections: the schadenfreude commences

[naraku360]

16 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

again, there is already plenty of republican bashing here with many points i agree with. i wont be adding anything new to the discussion by saying, i agree. 

So, you are playing defense for the guys you specifically said

29 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

a trump presidency wont do anything to stop the decline either, might even speed up said collapse. 

about because people are too mean to republicans?

If you seriously think we don't criticize dems, you aren’t reading the thread. All you do is push arguments against the literal only defense against Trump.

Maybe, just maybe, people go easier on dems because dems aren't the ones pushing for a cabinet full of Project 2025 freaks. Maybe, strictly speaking, they aren't as dangerous to us, nor the people we care about.

Maybe people are shitting on you for exclusively helping the side most likely to hurt us.

I, simply put, do not give a single solidarity flying fuck on a fucktoast sandwich whether or not Harris gives passable speeches. I have bigger fucking concerns. What third party candidate is better? Was it fucking RFK Jr (fuckinglol)? Jill Stein, who can't get on the ballot?

Your end goal isn't to criticize fairly; it's to punctuate every one of your criticisms about republicans with some kind of "but dems are as bad or worse" schtick. I think the acknowledgement that Trump "might" speed up the collapse of the country (fucking really? Might?) is, like, literally the only time I can think of in which you didn't follow it with insinuating we'd be better off with republicans, or that it doesn't matter because they're exactly the same. The thing is: You know goddamn fucking well they aren't exactly the same, and you know goddamn fucking well that republicans are a death cult run by an evil dumbass.

Edited August 26 by naraku360

[Distortedreasoning]

7 minutes ago, André Toulon said:

See, it's that reductive ass shit that makes people laugh at how you try to make points.

I won't speak for him, but what you call brainwashed, others call realism. There are 2 possible outcomes in November....none of them lean towards your alleged remedy for the nation. We will get a dem or a rep. 

But I'll be fair...you can toss around the word brainwashed, because I'm gonna sling delusional back at you. Only continuing the cycle and you validating your blatant disregard for those just like you by "adding something new" 

its the answer it deserved. 

but yes, this november it will be one or the other im aware.

the delusion is the people brainwashed into voting for either party. 

[André Toulon]

16 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

again, there is already plenty of republican bashing here with many points i agree with. i wont be adding anything new to the discussion by saying, i agree. 

Fine, I do want you to add something new.

How about you tell me what YOUR candidate will do for Americans. Instead of thinking of the same 3 ways to take a shit, let's hear some positive points from the candidate you support. Nabs made it a point to tell everyone I'm registered as independent....sway me. Free me from the mind washing.

[naraku360]

2 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

its the answer it deserved. 

but yes, this november it will be one or the other im aware.

the delusion is the people brainwashed into voting for either party. 

What is your solution?

Piss into the wind and open your mouth because you're thirsty and too dumb to figure out the bottle cap?

Edited August 26 by naraku360

[André Toulon]

1 minute ago, Distortedreasoning said:

its the answer it deserved. 

but yes, this november it will be one or the other im aware.

the delusion is the people brainwashed into voting for either party. 

Cool, cool....solution? 

 

[Distortedreasoning]

11 minutes ago, André Toulon said:

Cool, cool....solution? 

 

vote for a candidate that supports your policy. 3rd party will lose, but the system is kept afloat by the legitimacy people perceive it has. 

fight the system. lets say the 3rd party candidate wins, voting is still just a small part of the fight. one person wont change anything. support causes you believe in, like the student protests or other independent voices. join a socialist organization. make alliances with those who struggle on a global scale. donate to organizations that are dedicated to the fight. 

Edited August 26 by Distortedreasoning

[rpgamer]

Obviously the solution is to bomb the shit out of Israel to stop them committing genocide against Palestine.

If you really think your third party candidate wouldn't get chewed up and spit out by the corporate geopolitical world stage and end up folding on all their big talk, well.. I ain't the only one brainwashed between us..

[Distortedreasoning]

1 minute ago, rpgamer said:

Obviously the solution is to bomb the shit out of Israel to stop them committing genocide against Palestine.

If you really think your third party candidate wouldn't get chewed up and spit out by the corporate geopolitical world stage and end up folding on all their big talk, well.. I ain't the only one brainwashed between us..

i said there was more work to be done than just electing said candidate. one person alone wont be saving everyone. no one is coming to save you. there are many rogue elements in this state that would work hard to eliminate any threat to their power. 

[rpgamer]

The thing is. You haven't actually answered any question posed to you.

You are against the genocide of Palestine.

Ok, fair.

What is your solution?

Not some generalist grass-roots activism for some slow change.

An actual direct answer to the problem you are faced with.

Your grass roots activism isn't going to do shit to stop the genocide in the immediate.

Waving a magic wand to make them "just stop" doesn't solve the root causes.

If you're against the genocide, and that is literally the only issue you care about, you need to stop and ask yourself what actions you can take right now that will effect meaningful change. Protests? Socialist organizations? All while you literally acknowledge a Trump presidency would speed the Palestinian downfall.

You're pussyfooting because you want to believe you made a morally right choice, despite knowing, deep down, your very own actions are exactly the type that enable that which you abhor.

tl;dr, pick your battles. You can support all those independent causes you believe in while still acknowledging one party is actively worse for both this nation and those same causes. The only thing saving you from total cognitive dissonance is holding onto the belief that enough voters will keep Trump out of office so that you can sit on your high horse and declare your vote as inconsequential for someone you believed to be morally superior.

[scoobdog]

1 hour ago, Distortedreasoning said:

I’ve always been a policy guy. vote for the candidate that more closely aligns to what i believe. vote for kamala and what you get out of it? a country still in decline in most metrics, except for military,. a trump presidency wont do anything to stop the decline either, might even speed up said collapse. 

Burn it to the ground and start over isn’t a policy.

[scoobdog]

41 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

vote for a candidate that supports your policy. 3rd party will lose, but the system is kept afloat by the legitimacy people perceive it has. 

fight the system. lets say the 3rd party candidate wins, voting is still just a small part of the fight. one person wont change anything. support causes you believe in, like the student protests or other independent voices. join a socialist organization. make alliances with those who struggle on a global scale. donate to organizations that are dedicated to the fight. 

None of that is a solution.  All of that is you essentially saying “find someone with a solution and support them by giving them your money and a hearty thumbs up.”

[naraku360]

1 hour ago, Distortedreasoning said:

vote for a candidate that supports your policy. 3rd party will lose, but the system is kept afloat by the legitimacy people perceive it has. 

fight the system. lets say the 3rd party candidate wins, voting is still just a small part of the fight. one person wont change anything. support causes you believe in, like the student protests or other independent voices. join a socialist organization. make alliances with those who struggle on a global scale. donate to organizations that are dedicated to the fight. 

So we shouldn't vote for Harris because she won't change the things that no one person can change.

Instead, we should toss what little power we have into causes you also accept will lose.

That means your plan is to lose. Wtf?

Dude, no. I want to help society. I don’t have to support every aspect of a candidate to vote for them when they are clearly the better option any more than you're a brainwashed capitalist swine for using the commercialized internet on your device that was bought from a corporation from the comfort of the home you undoubtedly paid or still pay someone else to live in. Like it or not, it's the way the system is and breaking it from the outside is a fool's errand.

Edited August 26 by naraku360

[stilgar]

3 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

its the answer it deserved. 

but yes, this november it will be one or the other im aware.

the delusion is the people brainwashed into voting for either party. 

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[André Toulon]

6 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

vote for a candidate that supports your policy. 3rd party will lose, but the system is kept afloat by the legitimacy people perceive it has. 

fight the system. lets say the 3rd party candidate wins, voting is still just a small part of the fight. one person wont change anything. support causes you believe in, like the student protests or other independent voices. join a socialist organization. make alliances with those who struggle on a global scale. donate to organizations that are dedicated to the fight. 

That's not new at all. 

But I'll ask again....the candidate you support....what are their policies, what do they plan to do for the American people. Where can I see them campaign, hear their views. I want to hear you prop someone up instead of spewing more random venom and making baseless claims about other users. I need to know where my support should lie so I'm not just picking the least worst. Endorse this wonderful individual for l of us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's Trump, isn't it.

[Blackrose321]

9 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

trump aint my candidate and im not voting for him. 

 

as far as speaking goes, kamala is boring and cringe. theres a reason why she failed miserably in her previous attempts at presidency and why she's one of the least popular vp. her dmc speeches are always about stopping trump, same as bidens and hillarys speeches or everybody's elses speeches. vote for me or you get spooky man. trump does the same thing too, vote for me or spooky dems gonna turn america into communist lgbt utopia. they got their own talking points that pander to their own demographics. his speech ability is more entertaining than kamala, just based on how absurd everything he says is. like oh, hes talking about immigrants again. but ask me who i rather listen to? i shoot myself. 

 

i've always been a policy guy. vote for the candidate that more closely aligns to what i believe. vote for kamala and what you get out of it? a country still in decline in most metrics, except for military,. a trump presidency wont do anything to stop the decline either, might even speed up said collapse. 

A president isn't supposed to be exciting, we need to stop voting for reality stars. Plus, the first sentence in your second paragraph conflicts with the first sentence in your third paragraph. You're a policy guy but you want someone exciting. Policy wasn't meant to be exciting before it was turned into a sporting event in 2016.

So you aren't voting for Trump and you aren't voting Kamala, are you just in here arguing when you aren't going to vote at all? Your choice but a wee bit silly imo. Idealism without realism and all that jazz. Are you aware of when the last time was that a US president won via a third party? Hint: you weren't alive then. (ETA: And if you are looking for someone outside the Dem or Republican party once they became the major parties, it hasn't happened ever.) It's not smart to play this game you're playing right now, too much is on the line but maybe for you it isn't so it's easy to not worry and write it off as "both parties". Empathy would come in handy here, I think.

Btw, regarding your rant against party politics - been there, done that. I don't think you are talking to people who are fanboys and fangirls here though. I'm just too old to cut my own nose off to spite my face. I'm an idealist with a strong grip on reality and I wish I could help you grip on a little tighter yourself, honestly.

Edited August 26 by Blackrose321

[Blackrose321]

I'm not trying to be mean in my replies here but I'm honestly baffled that after 2016, and given what is already happening in the US, plus Project 2025, that anyone would still be out here treating this like a damn concert - you aren't looking for the most dramatic, rambling, shambling idiot on the stage because they make you laugh. This position used to mean something, wtf happened? Trump may make you laugh but he's a goddamn embarrassment, we were a laughingstock.

Anyone remember Gabriel Iglesias's sketch on this: 

 

Edited August 26 by Blackrose321

[naraku360]

17 minutes ago, Blackrose321 said:

A president isn't supposed to be exciting, we need to stop voting for reality stars. Plus, the first sentence in your second paragraph conflicts with the first sentence in your third paragraph. You're a policy guy but you want someone exciting. Policy wasn't meant to be exciting before it was turned into a sporting event in 2016.

So you aren't voting for Trump and you aren't voting Kamala, are you just in here arguing when you aren't going to vote at all? Your choice but a wee bit silly imo. Idealism without realism and all that jazz. Are you aware of when the last time was that a US president won via a third party? Hint: you weren't alive then. It's not smart to play this game you're playing right now, too much is on the line but maybe for you it isn't so it's easy to not worry and write it off as "both parties". Empathy would come in handy here, I think.

Btw, regarding your rant against party politics - been there, done that. I don't think you are talking to people who are fanboys and fangirls here though. I'm just too old to cut my own nose off to spite my face. I'm an idealist with a strong grip on reality and I wish I could help you grip on a little tighter yourself, honestly.

The only end goal I can think of from him is to just complain that people are voting at all.

An interesting goal that happens to favor a particular side.....

[Blackrose321]

14 minutes ago, naraku360 said:

The only end goal I can think of from him is to just complain that people are voting at all.

An interesting goal that happens to favor a particular side.....

lol maybe they are trying to pull a fast one but it would be a weird tactic. Humanists who believe in progression were never voting for a celebrity to begin with, we were never looking for someone to entertain us. That is the MAGA M.O., and it would be a gross mistake to think it applies to anyone who leans left.

That said, I think they are more likely Libertarian. It would explain coddling Trump while constantly finding fault with a black woman, while also being able to still technically say "Trump isn't my candidate" - he isn't but they'll still bow down anyways so it doesn't matter. Libertarians are children who were raised by neglectful parents. They never had chores or rules or discipline so when it was time to join Adult Land, they didn't adapt to adult expectations because they were spoiled all their lives. Listening to them talk is like listening to your teenager tell you how they think the world really works, it's hard not to roll your eyes.

[Raptorpat]

3 hours ago, Blackrose321 said:

Are you aware of when the last time was that a US president won via a third party? Hint: you weren't alive then.

Washington was a consensus candidate and Tyler got kicked out of his party after his VP election, otherwise iirc in any case where a new party's candidate won it's because that party had already absorbed a prior main party's infrastructure/base.

Edited August 26 by Raptorpat
Tyler not Taylor

[naraku360]

29 minutes ago, Blackrose321 said:

lol maybe they are trying to pull a fast one but it would be a weird tactic. Humanists who believe in progression were never voting for a celebrity to begin with, we were never looking for someone to entertain us. That is the MAGA M.O., and it would be a gross mistake to think it applies to anyone who leans left.

That said, I think they are more likely Libertarian. It would explain coddling Trump while constantly finding fault with a black woman, while also being able to still technically say "Trump isn't my candidate" - he isn't but they'll still bow down anyways so it doesn't matter. Libertarians are children who were raised by neglectful parents. They never had chores or rules or discipline so when it was time to join Adult Land, they didn't adapt to adult expectations because they were spoiled all their lives. Listening to them talk is like listening to your teenager tell you how they think the world really works, it's hard not to roll your eyes.

He was like this when it was Biden, too. He's taken the stance that voting for either party with a chance of winning means you are brainwashed, so we should vote to lose or not at all.

[1pooh4u]

10 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

its the answer it deserved. 

but yes, this november it will be one or the other im aware.

the delusion is the people brainwashed into voting for either party. 

Wow “it’s the answer it deserved”

ok, since we’re giving answers that are “deserved” your arguments are adolescent at best. infantile at worst. You sound like a brainwashed teenager, delusional and overly idealistic, absent of any realism whatsoever. Pretty typical of people when they have zero skin in the game. They can pretend to really care that they want to burn shit to the ground because absolutely nothing will change for them regardless of who wins.  It’s the pinnacle of privilege.   
we don’t need another Devil’s Advocate in this thread. We got one already. So please spare us with your knowledge that you think none of us knows except you.  

[naraku360]

*distorted rips his wig and it was MD all along!*

*MD rips off her wig and it was distorted all along!*

[1pooh4u]

5 hours ago, naraku360 said:

*distorted rips his wig and it was MD all along!*

*MD rips off her wig and it was distorted all along!*

Distorted’s condescending and bitchy answers are really cracking me tf up. I love the extra racist and misogynistic twist about Kamala’s speeches. It’s truly *chef’s kiss*

[scoobdog]

Seriously, I think Distrorted's reasoning is no different than Nabs - he'e more interested in razing the entire political establishment and building it back in an ideal image he hasn't actually formulated yet.  There are few key markers that indicate this:  (1) the fact he goes after liberals more aggressively than conservatives, (2) his shared belief in the main stream media conspiracy complex, and (3) his insistence that the masses on both sides are "brainwashed."  He's not particularly unique in being frustrated that the current system doesn't have the implements to alter human behavior, and, like most such malcontents, he conveniently forgets that the idiosyncratic devices that have given a comparative minority outsized power are invaluable when the majority harbors problematic behavior.  The government we have right now is specifically designed to compensate for populism; the evidence of that is the very people who are in a position to exploit the system have repeatedly sought to undermine it and overturn it when those exploits fail.  Most people would agree that having a system like that isn't just a sign of weakness, but a tacit admission that human beings are fallible.

Where Distorted might differ from the rest of us is that he lacks empathy.  While we can calculate the risk of government collapse to include the millions of underserved and underrepresented people, he can not.  For him, there is no down side to voting for a candidate that has no chance of winning because, like with conservatives that embrace a demagog Trump, the people who suffer most from a collapse are just numbers.  It's been a huge problem with Democrats for years, negotiating a coexistence between a party that includes a lot of disparate and disagreeing voices while still creating a unified platform to enact effective and comparatively harmless legislation.  He might say it's pointless to bash Republicans because everyone does it, but he really chooses to back Democrats more because they listen to people that disagree with him and expect him to sacrifice for the greater good.  It's goes hand-in-hand with the idea that major news outlets are conspiring to suppress voices, and it all leads to the idea that its easier to digest a world where opinions don't matter as much as achieving the one objectively true goal.

[Jman]

https://www.rawstory.com/georgia-election-board-kemp/
 

Georgia governor Brian Kemp is looking to expel the right wing members of an election board before the election.

[SwimOdin]

I’ve voted against Kemp twice, but he’s not the absolute worst.

[naraku360]

16 minutes ago, SwimOdin said:

I’ve voted against Kemp twice

Based

[katt_goddess]

15 hours ago, scoobdog said:

Burn it to the ground and start over isn’t a policy.

Especially when you have a long history of burning things to the ground and then getting bored and leaving someone else to deal with the ashes. 

Also, if your president is 'entertaining', you are probably watching a movie. 

[Blackrose321]

17 hours ago, scoobdog said:

Burn it to the ground and start over isn’t a policy.

This concept brings to mind what happened in Russia after they offed the tsar and his family. I'm not saying the tsar was a great leader. He wasn't. But in the end, they wound up with a dictator anyways because, as it turns out, it's easy to burn things down. It's hard to rebuild something sturdy. So many people will be vying for a position of power in the midst of pure chaos and not all of those people will be any better than what you just removed.

Russia holds "elections" but they're a sham. Putin has now ruled for two decades and even when he wasn't president, he was still president. As far as leadership goes, Russia didn't end up any better than where they began. Putin will keep resetting his term count until he dies, killing off his own people for funsies in a war he never should have started. Plus, Russia is so corrupt now that I can't see anyone decent being allowed to take the "throne" after he finally dies to dig them out of the hole.

You gotta think these kinds of things through and be adult enough to understand that your plan may not work out in the end. It's a huge gamble. No third party candidate will win, that's a fact. Why even talk about that right now?

ETA: Holy shit, is my math right - has Putin been "president" for 22.43% of the time since the last tsar was dethroned? Wild.

Edited August 27 by Blackrose321

[Master-Debater131]

Not surprisingly at all, Komrad Kamabla is trying to back out of the debates by forcing the already agreed upon rules to change. This really shouldnt be a surprise. Shes a fucking moron, and will do absolutely anything she can to avoid a live microphone. Shes trying to change the rules to allow notes and other fundamental changes to the already agreed upon rules. Give it a week and if they dont agree to the rules she will come up with some other excuse to not debate.

She already runs scared from even marginal questioning, so it really isnt a surprise that shes going to do the same here. Shes a coward and to stupid to hold up to a live debate without the use of notes.

I guess on the plus side she shows just enough mental ability to learn from her disastrous 2020 run where Tulsi Gabbard ended her before any voting started. Thats a looooowwwwww bar, but at least its a bar.

[Master-Debater131]

"Were going full communist!" Komrad Kamabla

"The fuck we are" - Sane Democrats

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/25/harris-grocery-price-gouging-backlash-00176266

"Under pressure to defend Kamala Harris’ grocery price gouging plan, some Democratic lawmakers are delivering a quiet message to anxious allies: Don’t worry about the details. It’s never going to pass Congress.

The Harris campaign’s proposal, unveiled as part of her first big economic policy speech, has become a focal point for her presidential rival, Donald Trump, and fellow Republicans, who claim she’s pushing “communist price controls.” It has also alarmed food industry officials and even some left-of-center economists, who’ve warned such policies can hurt more than they help."

 

Some Democrats are smart enough to realize just how disastrous of an idea that is and are running from it. Price controls never work, and they always lead to rationing and scarcity. Economists across the country panned the idea as the exact opposite of what we need to do to bring prices down, but that wont stop Komrad Kamabla. Shes just going to charge right ahead with the dumbest possible policy positions, you know, when she actually gives us one.

[Blackrose321]

Trump Says We ‘Gotta’ Restrict the First Amendment

Quote

 

On Monday, Trump complained about pushback to a proposal to sentence people to a year in jail for burning the American flag. 

“I wanna get a law passed […] You burn an American flag, you go to jail for one year. Gotta do it — you gotta do it,” Trump said. 

“They say, ‘Sir, that’s unconstitutional.’ We’ll make it constitutional.”

 

 

[Blackrose321]

He'll sentence people to jail for burning a flag but still no protection for children who don't want to get shot during art class.

ETA: Also, the U.S. Flag Code stipulates how the flag should be handled and it sounds like we have quite a few rule breakers out there:

• The flag should never touch the ground.
• The flag should be displayed from sunrise to sunset unless properly illuminated during darkness.
• The flag should never be used as apparel, bedding, or drapery.
• The flag should be handled respectfully, folded properly, and disposed of in a dignified manner, such as by burning, when it is no longer fit for display.

I'm pretty sure that wipes out like half of his cult right there.

Edited August 27 by Blackrose321

[discolé monade]

weird. so so weird. 

[1pooh4u]

Companies should be allowed to engage in price gouging is a weird fuckin stance 

[discolé monade]

26 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

23 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

 

what a weird little racist you are. so weird. so racist.

not demure. not cutesy. 

[Top Gun]

Never go full Jingo. 

[Blackrose321]

16 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

Companies should be allowed to engage in price gouging is a weird fuckin stance 

Something something something it'll trickle down?

[scoobdog]

Where’s @Distortedreasoning?

[Master-Debater131]

Damn those greedy grocery stores and their *checks notes* 1.6% profit margins

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/

 

If only they would refuse to have any profit at all! Then things would be better. Ya know, as long as it goes different than literally every single other time price controls and communism are implemented.

[naraku360]

52 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Not surprisingly at all, Komrad Kamabla is trying to back out of the debates by forcing the already agreed upon rules to change. This really shouldnt be a surprise. Shes a fucking moron, and will do absolutely anything she can to avoid a live microphone. Shes trying to change the rules to allow notes and other fundamental changes to the already agreed upon rules. Give it a week and if they dont agree to the rules she will come up with some other excuse to not debate.

She already runs scared from even marginal questioning, so it really isnt a surprise that shes going to do the same here. Shes a coward and to stupid to hold up to a live debate without the use of notes.

I guess on the plus side she shows just enough mental ability to learn from her disastrous 2020 run where Tulsi Gabbard ended her before any voting started. Thats a looooowwwwww bar, but at least its a bar.

 

[naraku360]

51 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

"Were going full communist!" Komrad Kamabla

"The fuck we are" - Sane Democrats

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/25/harris-grocery-price-gouging-backlash-00176266

"Under pressure to defend Kamala Harris’ grocery price gouging plan, some Democratic lawmakers are delivering a quiet message to anxious allies: Don’t worry about the details. It’s never going to pass Congress.

The Harris campaign’s proposal, unveiled as part of her first big economic policy speech, has become a focal point for her presidential rival, Donald Trump, and fellow Republicans, who claim she’s pushing “communist price controls.” It has also alarmed food industry officials and even some left-of-center economists, who’ve warned such policies can hurt more than they help."

 

Some Democrats are smart enough to realize just how disastrous of an idea that is and are running from it. Price controls never work, and they always lead to rationing and scarcity. Economists across the country panned the idea as the exact opposite of what we need to do to bring prices down, but that wont stop Komrad Kamabla. Shes just going to charge right ahead with the dumbest possible policy positions, you know, when she actually gives us one.

Not gonna lie here.

You are actually the dumbest person I know.

[naraku360]

7 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Damn those greedy grocery stores and their *checks notes* 1.6% profit margins

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/

 

If only they would refuse to have any profit at all! Then things would be better. Ya know, as long as it goes different than literally every single other time price controls and communism are implemented.

Losing the low hanging fruit of Joe Biden really took a toll on your mental health, huh?

[1pooh4u]

38 minutes ago, Blackrose321 said:

Something something something it'll trickle down?

Something something something, capitalism 

[Seight]

I love how I can tell something bad happened here whenever "Hot!" is next to the thread before I click on it.

[discolé monade]

23 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

 

In 2022, food prices increased by 9.9 percent, faster than in any year since 1979. Food-at-home prices increased by 11.4 percent, while food-away-from-home prices increased by 7.7 percent.

In 2023, food prices increased by 5.8 percent. Food price growth slowed in 2023 as economy-wide inflationary pressures, supply chain issues, and wholesale food prices eased from 2022. Food-at-home prices increased by 5.0 percent, and food-away-from-home prices increased by 7.1 percent. While prices increased for all food categories except for pork, prices grew more slowly in 2023 than in 2022 for all categories.

Beef and veal prices increased by 1.8 percent in July 2024 and have increased for 5 straight months. Prices for beef and veal were 4.5 percent higher than in July 2023 due to tight supplies and continued demand and are predicted to increase the most of all categories in 2024. Beef and veal prices are predicted to increase 5.6 percent in 2024, with a prediction interval of 2.9 to 8.4 percent.

Prices for fish and seafood fell by 1.1 percent in July 2024 and were 1.6 percent lower than July 2023. Fish and seafood are expected to experience the largest decline in prices across categories in 2024, partially due to weaker demand. Prices for fish and seafood are predicted to decrease 1.5 percent in 2024, with a prediction interval of -2.6 to -0.3 percent.

Retail egg prices rose by 5.7 percent in July 2024 after falling for the prior 3 months. An outbreak of HPAI that began in 2022 contributed to elevated egg prices by reducing the U.S. egg-layer flock. New confirmations of HPAI in egg layers beginning in November 2023 drove price increases in late 2023 and early 2024. Egg prices in July 2024 were 19.1 percent higher than those in July 2023 but still well below peak prices in January 2023. Price impacts of the HPAI outbreak will be monitored closely. Egg prices are predicted to increase 2.4 percent in 2024, with a prediction interval of -2.8 to 8.5 percent. This wide prediction interval reflects the volatility in retail egg prices.

Fresh vegetable prices increased by 1.2 percent in July 2024 and were 0.4 percent higher than July 2023. Prices for fresh vegetables are predicted to increase 1.3 percent in 2024, with a prediction interval of -0.6 to 3.2 percent.

Prices fell by 0.3 percent from June to July 2024 for the other foods category, which included a 1.6 percent decrease for snacks. The other foods category also includes soups, frozen prepared foods, sauces and condiments, baby food, and other miscellaneous foods. Prices for other foods are predicted to increase 1.0 percent in 2024, with a prediction interval of 0.0 to 1.9 percent.

[1pooh4u]

Grocery stores set their own prices on meats and shit?  I thought that was mostly done through distributors or wtf?  Wouldn’t grocery stores have higher profits if along the chain they weren’t quadrupling prices? 

[naraku360]

9 minutes ago, Seight said:

I love how I can tell something bad happened here whenever "Hot!" is next to the thread before I click on it.

I was worried about MD. She's not taking this whole black woman winning thing well, especially when she's beating the guy MD was calling an insane authoritarian just a few months ago.

[Blackrose321]

29 minutes ago, naraku360 said:

I was worried about MD. She's not taking this whole black woman winning thing well, especially when she's beating the guy MD was calling an insane authoritarian just a few months ago.

They've been stewing about Obama since 2008! And the only thing "worse" to them than a black man is a black woman. If she wins...well, I don't even know how to describe the insanity I'm expecting. The frothing at the mouth, eyes bulging, spluttering kind of crazy. It'll be ugly, these people will have a complete meltdown.

[naraku360]

20 minutes ago, Blackrose321 said:

They've been stewing about Obama since 2008! And the only thing "worse" to them than a black man is a black woman. If she wins...well, I don't even know how to describe the insanity I'm expecting. The frothing at the mouth, eyes bulging, spluttering kind of crazy. It'll be ugly, these people will have a complete meltdown.

MD's descent into madness was shockingly rapid. We've been through this routine with a number of people before, and they're usually too dense to see the writing on the wall. This level of denial is typically reserved for after they've eaten their words.