I cheerfully gave up my Twitter account months ago, when it started to get overrun by radicalized right-wing trolls following Elon's purchase.
I haven't looked back. There are lots of places to find news - even breaking news - that don't subject one to so much Twitter BS.
Twitter was once a great free app. I gained several life-long friendships there, got tons of great information related to my then-actuve consulting practice, and it enriched my life both personally and professionally.
Elon ruined it. Nobody needs to stay there when there are so many really good options to achieve the same thing.
Most likely photoshopped. The label was too clean and didn't follow the curve of the surface it was supposed to be adhered to. Cheap shot at American sensibilities -- there are enough real ones to not need counterfeits
In response to the comment about running and retiring being a “scam of the Democrats”, Republican Jim Durkin just did it. Ran and won re-election to the State House in November, then stepped down in January so the party could name his successor.
Rep. Durkin saw the post election numbers and knew that being the leader of the "superminority" was pointless. He did vote to ban assault weapons the week before he resigned.
Kind of moot. Illinois is a firmly democratic state. The house for over 25 years, the senate for over 20 years and the governor for 16 of last 20 years. Same can be said of the city and neither will change in the foreseeable future.
Your response to Beth B. calling out an overreaching claim of sexism was spot-on as usual. I wouldn't have been so gracious in accepting the Shakespeare quote though. Hoist[ed] "with" (original), or "by "(acceptable), but never "on" (nonsensical).
Hmmmm. Two guys disagree it's sexism (at least partially). I get that people think it's a "crisis" now, but consider it somewhat akin to sports -- if your quarterback is injured, your team will not get the same result. It's the same thing. There are rules. And they have to be followed. And I don't really recall calls for Ted Kennedy to resign. He was the "Lion of the Senate" after all ... NO ONE makes a Kennedy do anything (at least that generation).
You are overlooking the point that Kennedy's was not a decisive vote at the time. And that the rules DO in fact, allow for an incapacitated senator to resign just as the rules of football allow for a substitute QB -- the team does not have go without a QB when the starter gets hurt or force the injured one to keep playing.
When the Senate is essentially tied between Democrats and the GQP, it is important that the Senator from California, representing 40 million citizens, can do the job. If she were to resign, the governor could appoint a person who can walk into the Senate chambers and actively participate in the legislative process.
Just today, the Senate voted 50-49 to revoke a rule on truck emissions. Manchin voted with 49 Republicans to revoke the rule. Had Feinstein or her replacement been there, and presumably voted no on revocation, it would have been a 50-50 split, and VP Harris could have voted to save the rule. Because Feinstein sits on the judiciary committee and can't easily be replaced, judges don't make it out of committee to be confirmed. It's not sexism that makes people want her to resign but a desire to remove these very real world consequences where you have a dead seat that she occupies causing harm to her party's agenda.
When Kennedy was in office, the Democrats held from 55-57 seats in the 111th Congress the year he died. When McCain died, I believe the Republicans held a 53-47 majority. Neither of these individuals held the balance of power hostage by not resigning. Plus, it's likely that a significant change in Obamacare may have taken place as McCain was a deciding vote to save it in the Senate while he was ill. Had he resigned, likely a very different person would have been the junior senator from Arizona. The sexism charge does not hold up to the facts.
Although I mainly agree with your take on the difference between the urgency of replacing Sen. Feinstein and that of replacing some other relatively recent ailing senators, I don't think I can agree that Ted Kennedy's failure to leave earlier didn't substantially thwart important work. Kennedy was seriously ill by the time in June (July?) 2009 when a contested U S. Senate race in Minnesota was finally called for Al Franken. Due to the long summer recess that soon followed and other enshrined time off, there were perhaps a dozen working weeks when Obama had a technically veto-proof Senate majority to work with before Ted died--but Ted was bedridden nearly that entire time. And while, from a distance, it seemed that only an incompetant selection of a Democratic candidate to run for his seat in the special election that followed, or an incompetent campaign by that candidate, could possibly turn Ted's seat red around the start of 2010, turn red it did. Obama has long been scorned for not getting his ambitious agenda enacted during his first two years. It's rarely acknowledged that he had a functionally veto-proof majority for only few days or weeks, not the two years commonly cited by critics,thanks to Ted's clinging to that seat and the failed effort to replace him.
I use the Tweeter strictly to teach about outdoor cooking and promote Amazingibs.com. Because I own a business and I need everybody to use it, I NEVER comment on race religion or politics. I gladly paid $84 to Musk because the Blue Check allows me 10,000 characters so I can teach more. It also gives me greater visibility. Simple.
I don't fault Feinstein for not stepping down; I fault Dick Durbin for allowing her appointment to the Judiciary Committee. He should have foreseen her possible absence and how that would affect Biden's judicial nominations.
Particularly since Alex Padilla, the other senator from California is also on the committee. But maybe the 80-year-old Durbin doesn't like imagining future medical issues.
That's a really interesting point. Who's 'staffing' the team (doling out committee assignments) and what considerations are they to make? Give someone plum committee spots giving respect to their skill level and seniority, or give them less important committee assignments when that seniority might prove problematic. In the private sector, the latter would mean an agism lawsuit; in Congress, it would just 'look bad.'
Second is about replacing dollar bills with coins. Prior to 2019 the GAO recommended doing so, but what they did not take into account, because it does not matter to congress, is the "Seigniorage", which is the economic cost to people who hold currency that they do not circulate. Coins are much more often left at home sitting in coin jars and on dressers where they do not earn interest. That is an opportunity cost to the holders of the currency which accrues to the benefit of the US Treasury. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/151052399
In 2019 the GAO changed its recommendation to stick with paper dollars because they are not get worn out as quickly as they used to.
“As you may have heard, Twitter under Elon Musk has made the bizarre, troubling and amusing decision to change the meaning of the little blue checkmark badge that accompanies the user’s identification on the social media platform.” --Zorn
This may seem out of the ordinary, but why not try on (read at your own risk) the Stoic view that Twitter is external to us and has no control over our lives in any way. The change of the “little blue checkmark badge” is Elon Musk’s decision, and clearly it affects people in different ways, but why be troubled about it?
I do not subscribe to Twitter because I have never felt a need for it, but if I was deriving value from the site, Eric’s idea of paying a small monthly/yearly fee to use it makes sense to me because it appeals to my preferences.
But, why be upset?
I derive little obvious benefit from the site because I don’t use it, and the changed meaning of the past blue badge isn’t troubling to me at all, except as it may relate to people hurting who don’t want it. But, if it troubles people enough, why not just drop it and put something different together?
This sagacious article seems like an answer to the burning question: What would Eric do?
"As noted in my original item, each penny costs 2.1 cents to make; each nickel costs 8.52 cents. This discrepancy costs us close to $150 million a year..."
However, you have to factor in how long coins last vs how quickly bills wear out. I think it's pretty significant. That said, I'm not carrying ANY change in my pockets and not finding it to be a problem. I do have some change in the little drawer in my car for take-out meals at places that charge extra for using credit cards. Otherwise, it's plastic and Apple pay.
Paper money lasts maybe 5 years, coins maybe 25. But that's good, because there is a much larger markup on paper money.
I too carry coins in my car. Last night the car in front of me at the drive-through passed a phone in five different times before payment was registered. Using a combination of paper and metallic money I was able to accomplish the same thing in one pass.
Shingles generally lasts 3-5 weeks and is not permanently incapacitating. Complications may linger for several more months. If that is Sen. Feinstein's only issue, then she is not "certainly permanently incapacitated". And, while Sen. Feinstein, the California Democratic Party, and the voters could not have anticipated the specific ailment, they most certainly knew the risk of electing an 85-year-old to a six-year term. The average life span of a wealthy, white woman is 90. Anyone with any life experience knows that the later years are subject to physical and cognitive decline. Feinstein, the party, and the voters made a political choice to cast the dice.
I agree with EZ that there might have been a better way to charge fees to twitter users. But the pay-to-quit study does not necessarily translate into willingness-to-pay. Particularly for services that people think are or should be free. This is also true for services that have a high percentage of casual or entertainment users that are able to opt for other entertainments. But I am mystified as to how Twitter could have $4.5 billion in revenue and still be unprofitable. Their financial statements are pretty obscure, but they appear to have massive marketing expenses (25% of revenue) and massive R&D expenses (25% of revenue). Their operating expenses (35% of revenue) seem to be heavily burdened with depreciation and amortization costs. I will be curious to see the 2022 results.
I'm a constitutional conservative, and avidly follow politics and events on a local, national and worldwide basis. And as all my acquaintances are well aware, (including likely my fellow PS subscribers), I do form opinions and policy positions which I am not bashful to share with others.
However, I voluntarily censor any political or partisan comment from postings on my Facebook account. My posts are comprised of photos of beauty in nature, striking the skyscapes, the abundant wildlife in my area, my dogs and on occasion visiting family and friends. I have about 140 Facebook friends and they include people at all points along the political spectrum from left, center and right. I do not see Facebook as a place where my friends and family should be proselytized to my political views.
When I wish to share political commentary and content with others of my beliefs, or to engage people of differing views in respectful discussion and debate, I can do it in a targeted manner in email (or to verbally joust with some of you in PS postings! 🙂).
I cheerfully gave up my Twitter account months ago, when it started to get overrun by radicalized right-wing trolls following Elon's purchase.
I haven't looked back. There are lots of places to find news - even breaking news - that don't subject one to so much Twitter BS.
Twitter was once a great free app. I gained several life-long friendships there, got tons of great information related to my then-actuve consulting practice, and it enriched my life both personally and professionally.
Elon ruined it. Nobody needs to stay there when there are so many really good options to achieve the same thing.
Is there a chance any visual tweets are "photo shopped"? That gas pump was, um...
All were pretty dang funny this week as often happens
Most likely photoshopped. The label was too clean and didn't follow the curve of the surface it was supposed to be adhered to. Cheap shot at American sensibilities -- there are enough real ones to not need counterfeits
In response to the comment about running and retiring being a “scam of the Democrats”, Republican Jim Durkin just did it. Ran and won re-election to the State House in November, then stepped down in January so the party could name his successor.
Rep. Durkin saw the post election numbers and knew that being the leader of the "superminority" was pointless. He did vote to ban assault weapons the week before he resigned.
Yep, Durkin was at least reasonable. He was replaced by a Keith Pekau clone/Trumper though. Hopefully this guy gets stomped on two years.
Kind of moot. Illinois is a firmly democratic state. The house for over 25 years, the senate for over 20 years and the governor for 16 of last 20 years. Same can be said of the city and neither will change in the foreseeable future.
Your response to Beth B. calling out an overreaching claim of sexism was spot-on as usual. I wouldn't have been so gracious in accepting the Shakespeare quote though. Hoist[ed] "with" (original), or "by "(acceptable), but never "on" (nonsensical).
Hmmmm. Two guys disagree it's sexism (at least partially). I get that people think it's a "crisis" now, but consider it somewhat akin to sports -- if your quarterback is injured, your team will not get the same result. It's the same thing. There are rules. And they have to be followed. And I don't really recall calls for Ted Kennedy to resign. He was the "Lion of the Senate" after all ... NO ONE makes a Kennedy do anything (at least that generation).
You are overlooking the point that Kennedy's was not a decisive vote at the time. And that the rules DO in fact, allow for an incapacitated senator to resign just as the rules of football allow for a substitute QB -- the team does not have go without a QB when the starter gets hurt or force the injured one to keep playing.
When the Senate is essentially tied between Democrats and the GQP, it is important that the Senator from California, representing 40 million citizens, can do the job. If she were to resign, the governor could appoint a person who can walk into the Senate chambers and actively participate in the legislative process.
Just today, the Senate voted 50-49 to revoke a rule on truck emissions. Manchin voted with 49 Republicans to revoke the rule. Had Feinstein or her replacement been there, and presumably voted no on revocation, it would have been a 50-50 split, and VP Harris could have voted to save the rule. Because Feinstein sits on the judiciary committee and can't easily be replaced, judges don't make it out of committee to be confirmed. It's not sexism that makes people want her to resign but a desire to remove these very real world consequences where you have a dead seat that she occupies causing harm to her party's agenda.
When Kennedy was in office, the Democrats held from 55-57 seats in the 111th Congress the year he died. When McCain died, I believe the Republicans held a 53-47 majority. Neither of these individuals held the balance of power hostage by not resigning. Plus, it's likely that a significant change in Obamacare may have taken place as McCain was a deciding vote to save it in the Senate while he was ill. Had he resigned, likely a very different person would have been the junior senator from Arizona. The sexism charge does not hold up to the facts.
Although I mainly agree with your take on the difference between the urgency of replacing Sen. Feinstein and that of replacing some other relatively recent ailing senators, I don't think I can agree that Ted Kennedy's failure to leave earlier didn't substantially thwart important work. Kennedy was seriously ill by the time in June (July?) 2009 when a contested U S. Senate race in Minnesota was finally called for Al Franken. Due to the long summer recess that soon followed and other enshrined time off, there were perhaps a dozen working weeks when Obama had a technically veto-proof Senate majority to work with before Ted died--but Ted was bedridden nearly that entire time. And while, from a distance, it seemed that only an incompetant selection of a Democratic candidate to run for his seat in the special election that followed, or an incompetent campaign by that candidate, could possibly turn Ted's seat red around the start of 2010, turn red it did. Obama has long been scorned for not getting his ambitious agenda enacted during his first two years. It's rarely acknowledged that he had a functionally veto-proof majority for only few days or weeks, not the two years commonly cited by critics,thanks to Ted's clinging to that seat and the failed effort to replace him.
EZ - THe Gas pump tweet looks like it's digitally altered/photoshopped.
I use the Tweeter strictly to teach about outdoor cooking and promote Amazingibs.com. Because I own a business and I need everybody to use it, I NEVER comment on race religion or politics. I gladly paid $84 to Musk because the Blue Check allows me 10,000 characters so I can teach more. It also gives me greater visibility. Simple.
I don't fault Feinstein for not stepping down; I fault Dick Durbin for allowing her appointment to the Judiciary Committee. He should have foreseen her possible absence and how that would affect Biden's judicial nominations.
Particularly since Alex Padilla, the other senator from California is also on the committee. But maybe the 80-year-old Durbin doesn't like imagining future medical issues.
That's a really interesting point. Who's 'staffing' the team (doling out committee assignments) and what considerations are they to make? Give someone plum committee spots giving respect to their skill level and seniority, or give them less important committee assignments when that seniority might prove problematic. In the private sector, the latter would mean an agism lawsuit; in Congress, it would just 'look bad.'
SO agree with the comments on Kelley and Ramirez. So heavy handed and blatant and nasty.
I only open Twitter when there is a story of momentous proportions to follow.
Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox got a pass.
RE: pennies, and coins in general. There are interesting reports from Planet Money on this.
First there is a story about a congressman tried to kill the penny. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2020/07/14/890435359/is-it-time-to-kill-the-penny
Second is about replacing dollar bills with coins. Prior to 2019 the GAO recommended doing so, but what they did not take into account, because it does not matter to congress, is the "Seigniorage", which is the economic cost to people who hold currency that they do not circulate. Coins are much more often left at home sitting in coin jars and on dressers where they do not earn interest. That is an opportunity cost to the holders of the currency which accrues to the benefit of the US Treasury. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/151052399
In 2019 the GAO changed its recommendation to stick with paper dollars because they are not get worn out as quickly as they used to.
“As you may have heard, Twitter under Elon Musk has made the bizarre, troubling and amusing decision to change the meaning of the little blue checkmark badge that accompanies the user’s identification on the social media platform.” --Zorn
This may seem out of the ordinary, but why not try on (read at your own risk) the Stoic view that Twitter is external to us and has no control over our lives in any way. The change of the “little blue checkmark badge” is Elon Musk’s decision, and clearly it affects people in different ways, but why be troubled about it?
I do not subscribe to Twitter because I have never felt a need for it, but if I was deriving value from the site, Eric’s idea of paying a small monthly/yearly fee to use it makes sense to me because it appeals to my preferences.
But, why be upset?
I derive little obvious benefit from the site because I don’t use it, and the changed meaning of the past blue badge isn’t troubling to me at all, except as it may relate to people hurting who don’t want it. But, if it troubles people enough, why not just drop it and put something different together?
This sagacious article seems like an answer to the burning question: What would Eric do?
Me? I’m indifferent.
"As noted in my original item, each penny costs 2.1 cents to make; each nickel costs 8.52 cents. This discrepancy costs us close to $150 million a year..."
According to https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12771.htm it costs 7.5 cents to make a dollar bill, and 17.0 cents to make a $100 bill. So whatever they lose on the coins they make back on the paper money.
I suppose this could be called a specie-ous argument.
However, you have to factor in how long coins last vs how quickly bills wear out. I think it's pretty significant. That said, I'm not carrying ANY change in my pockets and not finding it to be a problem. I do have some change in the little drawer in my car for take-out meals at places that charge extra for using credit cards. Otherwise, it's plastic and Apple pay.
Paper money lasts maybe 5 years, coins maybe 25. But that's good, because there is a much larger markup on paper money.
I too carry coins in my car. Last night the car in front of me at the drive-through passed a phone in five different times before payment was registered. Using a combination of paper and metallic money I was able to accomplish the same thing in one pass.
Shingles generally lasts 3-5 weeks and is not permanently incapacitating. Complications may linger for several more months. If that is Sen. Feinstein's only issue, then she is not "certainly permanently incapacitated". And, while Sen. Feinstein, the California Democratic Party, and the voters could not have anticipated the specific ailment, they most certainly knew the risk of electing an 85-year-old to a six-year term. The average life span of a wealthy, white woman is 90. Anyone with any life experience knows that the later years are subject to physical and cognitive decline. Feinstein, the party, and the voters made a political choice to cast the dice.
I agree with EZ that there might have been a better way to charge fees to twitter users. But the pay-to-quit study does not necessarily translate into willingness-to-pay. Particularly for services that people think are or should be free. This is also true for services that have a high percentage of casual or entertainment users that are able to opt for other entertainments. But I am mystified as to how Twitter could have $4.5 billion in revenue and still be unprofitable. Their financial statements are pretty obscure, but they appear to have massive marketing expenses (25% of revenue) and massive R&D expenses (25% of revenue). Their operating expenses (35% of revenue) seem to be heavily burdened with depreciation and amortization costs. I will be curious to see the 2022 results.
I'm a constitutional conservative, and avidly follow politics and events on a local, national and worldwide basis. And as all my acquaintances are well aware, (including likely my fellow PS subscribers), I do form opinions and policy positions which I am not bashful to share with others.
However, I voluntarily censor any political or partisan comment from postings on my Facebook account. My posts are comprised of photos of beauty in nature, striking the skyscapes, the abundant wildlife in my area, my dogs and on occasion visiting family and friends. I have about 140 Facebook friends and they include people at all points along the political spectrum from left, center and right. I do not see Facebook as a place where my friends and family should be proselytized to my political views.
When I wish to share political commentary and content with others of my beliefs, or to engage people of differing views in respectful discussion and debate, I can do it in a targeted manner in email (or to verbally joust with some of you in PS postings! 🙂).