when i win, i will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one

today is the fourth anniversary of the russian invasion.  four years.  that is so crazy to me.  ~a demographic collapse?  ~a a: Okay, I remember that hypothetical. Not sure if it was a prediction. It's become a little less.... urgent of an issue given the overall demographic collapse that humanity is seeing. -Paul 2024 election voter fraud case.  "letter of reprimand" sounds pretty weak.  but it is apparently the norm.  ~a the tariff refund, if it happens, will be 15x larger than the tax-payer-donation to the board of peace.  and ultimately paid, from the domestic tax payer, to foreign companies.  foreign companies that were (now illegally) charged.  ~a the supreme court just ruled on the tariffs.  i'm a bit surprised actually that the stock market didn't freak the fuck out, considering how volatile the tariffs made the stock market earlier.  (EVEN if there is a tariff refund, which hasn't been made explicit yet) the tariffs don't get refunded to us.  even though we paid for them  ~a mig:  further?  i think he was arguing that the board of peace goes too far.  ~a xpovos:  i would go further.  The UN doesn’t just suck, its actively harmful, and probably an antisemitic institution. - mig yep i think we're agreed.  if i went out of my way to try to argue FOR the board of peace getting $10b of my taxpayer money, i still wouldn't be able to get past the obvious real lack of independence and oversight.  also i wouldn't be able to get past the perceived lack of independence and oversight.  there's good reason the UN doesn't, in it's charter, answer to any asshole billionaires.  ~a just makes it all less likely.  Ultimately, I think the most significant outcomes will be waste and fraud, and mostly nothing on geopoltics. So we're actually pretty well aligned, I think. -- Xpovos a: I was talking to Paul last night and brought this question up.  It was probably more than can fit in a message here. Gist is: 10B, if true, could be perceived as a cost of doing business, to put heat on the UN to stop sucking.  It's not "good," but it could have political outcomes that are favorable. Particularly from certain angles. The intent seems more likely to be corruption and graft, but that doesn't preclude good political outcomes any thoughts on the Board of Peace?  by some reports the us taxpayers might transfer 10b to the board of peace?  and right on the heels of the $10b he's already getting from the justice department?  how many billions did biden+obama transfer to their organizations?  thank god trump isn't taking his 0.0004b salary.  ~a paul:  you wrote a blog entry "about men being extinct in the future".    i don't think it had anything to do with science, but i might be remembering wrong.  along the lines of women are able to impregnate themselves and that they are increasingly bisexual.  is that science?  i'm not remembering all of the details.  ~a mig:  looks like i didn't have to wait long.  ~a a:  looks like they finally arrested Prince Andrew, though it looks like its not related to his abuse of Virginia Giuffre.  It is something though. - mig a: "do you remember your argument about (human) men becoming extinct?" Not really. Was it because I figured our contribution to reproduction would be replaced by science? -Paul mig:  true.  i'll keep holding out hope.  ~a at least not to the point where it would outweigh the damage/harassment of innocents from the files. - mig a:  these arrests happened 6-7 years ago.  unless there’s evidence linking bin sulayem to a crime we’ve basically got nothing on actual criminal activity beyond those 3.  I’m sure bin sulayem’s firing feels good but I’m not sure the victim’s causes are advanced much by that. - mig mig: we haven't? epstein, maxwell, and brunel were charged using the files. bin sulayem resigned as ceo, over trump's release. that got the victims something.  but I also assume there will be more. as the files are still not released! yes, there were certainly people harmed in the the process, but I think we should consider those materially harmed first: the sexual assault victims that were named by the justice department (maliciously?)  ~a a:  and we have gotten no closer to finding evidence to help those victims.  And we’ve harmed innocent people in this process. - mig mig:  "What the fuck are we doing here?" do you want me to reply with the same energy? it's a huge literal-conspiracy.  many many women and girls were raped.  ~a a:  I have to ask again.  What the fuck are we doing here?  We aren't getting any closer to prosecuting anyone.  All we've accomplished so far is some public naming and shaming that may or may not be deserved.  Bondi is probably a fucking incompetent moron who probably should resign, but Ro Khanna is a fucking malicious moron who probably should be expelled from congress. - mig and Khanna blaming the DoJ is absolutely fucking cowardly because 1)  he was the one agitating for these people to be unredacted, 2)  he had full access to the unredacted files and could have probably easily ascertained these people had no real links to epstein. - mig https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/13/four-men-unredacted-epstein-files-no-ties-ro-khanna so now it turns out that 4 of these people Ro Khanna had absolutely no links to Epstein, so he ended up slandering them on the house floor (though he is apparently immune from being sued as a "privilege" of being a congressman speaking on the floor). - mig mig:  for bin sulayem i don't think i've seen evidence of a crime:  or at least not evidence bin sulayem comitted a crime.  it is a "prime example of the many redactions that were protecting sex pests with ties to trump".  which is maybe a mistake.  but also super suspicious.  though i'm not sure anybody has any intention of indicting bondi any time in the next three years.  ~a a:  I don’t know.  what evidence exists for bin sulayem?  exchanging explicit emails or being friends with isn’t a crime nor is evidence of one.  - mig mig:  bin sulayem just resigned his job today (ceo of dp world).  not charged with a crime, yet.  but it is a start.  calling these files vile and creepy is fine, because they are.  but they are also evidence of illegal behavior.  jeffrey epstein and ghislaine maxwell were charged using these files.  and there will be at least a few more.  you agree?  ~a paul:  oh man.  18 is so close!  do you remember your argument about (human) men becoming extinct?  i don't remember any of the details.  does new data change your thoughts on this, or no?  ~a a: a+miguel+pierce+dewey+paul+travis+vinnie+david+aaron+aparna+andrew? By my count (which could be out of date), we are at 18. I did my part to try to get us to replacement level. Some slackers are not helping. -Paul mig:  you agree then?  i think that's what i said.  ~a a:  if we aren’t getting closer to bringing actual criminal charges to people, then no I don’t consider that to be of much substance.  Naming and shaming people over vile and creepy emails might be cathartic, but I don’t think its very productive towards seeking justice. - mig mig:  pretty well timed question this morning.  where are you?  are you ok,  i loved the torture video.  i'm definitely not using bin sulayem as a prime example of "anything of real substance out of these files", but as a prime example of the many redactions that were protecting sex pests with ties to trump.  ~a paul:  (also since it's not obvious from my quote, "you" = aaron)  ~a paul:  my count is probably a bit off, but i still think my guess for 2023 was right on.  and, i still don't think we'll ever reach replacement (22), but it looks like we got much closer than i thought we would.  ~a paul:  touching back on this since we talked about it at your party:  from 2013:  "me+miguel+pierce+dewey+paul+travis+vinnie+david+you+aparna+andrew=6 kids" from 2018:  "i predicted we'd be at 10-12 kids in 2018 and we are!  (12 kids?)  11 of us, 12 kids, we passed half way to replacement.  i predict in 2023 we are at 14-16 kids."  other than being right on my prediction, i have otherwise lost count in 2026, can you do the count for me?  ~a a: https://x.com/WUTangKids/status/2021399603162251326 I think this should work? -Paul mig:  it's way too soon to tell.  they still have not released all of the un-redacted files.  many of the redactions are (obviously, provably, uncontroversially) illegal, in contrary to law.  ~a paul:  where do i see it?  ~a a:  have we gotten anything of real substance out of these files? - mig a:  has all these epstein files dumps been worth the squeeze?  There sees to have been a lot of collateral damage, including for people who had just passing mention in the files.  There looks to be no evidence to implicate anybody else (no matter who much wishcasting khanna and massie might want there to be). - mig a: There's a pretty good meme going around X where they subtitle his performance with an economic argument against the Jones Act. -Paul "Bad Bunny traveled 124 yards with the football during his halftime show, beating the Patriots 79 total rushing yards in the game."  ~a a: I noticed it awhile ago but didn't want to give you the satisfaction of commenting on it. -Paul a: Tell me that Trump hasn't read the Constitution (that he swore to uphold) without telling me he hasn't read it. -- Xpovos xpovos:  I wanted to see how long it would take for someone to say something.  i removed the tilting text.  ~a mig:  "President Donald Trump ... suggestion that Republicans 'nationalize' elections as he continued to make false claims of widespread voter fraud and refused to accept his 2020 defeat".  ~a The tilted comments are doing my head in. -- Xpovos a: White House officials can claim whatever they want but presumably there will be a more in-depth investigation. Still, the law tends to side with law enforcement so I wouldn't be surprised if the agent was exonerated. -Paul a:  are we talking about the save act or something else?  I don’t know what “federalizing” or “nationalizing” elections means? - mig should the us government federalize elections?  i assume in this case, the federal executive would be in charge of all elections, including the midterms and local elections?  ~a what is going on in the comment threads of this video  ~a attempted tyranny?  ~a a:  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/20/fox-news-reporter-targeted-us-government wasn’t for a lack of trying - mig mig:  i don't remember hearing about the biden or obama administration arresting anyone in fox news, or in oan, or in newsmax.  i think if they had done that, people would be rightfully losing their shit.  ~a mig:  isn't arresting someone in the press who hasn't broken the law actually illegal though?  who broke the law here?  isn't it insanely concerning given the circumstances?  is this tyranny?  ~a a:  absent any new information, arresting lemon seems wrong and a pointless exercise.  As much as he is a fucking race baiting clown, that isn’t illegal. - mig arresting people for doing reporting that you don't like seems like a problem.  i hate newsmax and oan, obviously, but arresting newsmax and oan reporters for reporting on a nonviolent (or even more-so a violent) protest seems crazy to me.  ~a