Meanwhile, on the platform formerly known as Twitter, the Matrix is glitching HARD… 
Discussion
i wonder how many years later from '09 they realised they should try and adjust
The first part of the sentence, goes with the last one, in the first tweet. Israel and Ukraine are American allies, and national security comes first. Secondly, we all must agree that modernizing the IRS, is key, in a way that everyone pays their dues, in a perhaps future automated system. The whole country runs on taxes. Now, making these changes effective, affects the whole. Your approach, and that of most, with regards to bitcoin, and change, is wrong. It adapts a victim’s mentality, and thus why there is very few counter arguments against critics, and critiques. Consider religion, no one can debate, or argue agains God, or Jesus. Try as you may. Find all the philosophy, and smartest of comments, which sound rational. The point is, if you’re selling change, make sure your customer is satisfied, and all queries are solved, lest, it’s self-defeating, and they not only take their business elsewhere, but leave you with unresolved dogmas, kind of like Abe Simpson arguing with a cloud. Didn’t, and wasn’t Donald Trump forced to show his tax documents? Don’t the corrupt ones get evicted, and kicked out, eventually? Like that gold smuggler? Mend something. Look at this tweet with fresh eyes, and realize what you’re doing/saying.
I disagree with all of this. I’m hopeful my representatives can sift thru all the political noise and actually stop funding endless wars and liberal pet projects.
Probably won’t happen, but I’m hopeful.
Your words…
I agree with you disagreeing with me.
However, therein lies the problem. You’ve already created in your mind what part of #reality you do not agree with, yet your faith is in doubt (last statement). Your bio says “end the fed,” but you don’t fully understand the entirety of the situation. What of dealing with reality as it is, and starting to build up from there? Read her tweet again, and remember your loyalty is in the USA.
You make a lot of assumptions about me.
I’m confident that the government will not act in my best interests, whichever branch and whichever person is elected.
That doesn’t change my desired outcome, and doesn’t make me less patriotic (that was random, btw) or less realistic.
Liberal talking points need to be ignored. Run the country on the best interests of *this country* is my only point.
Give me one assumption I made, that wasn’t part of your words, bio, or comment. Based on how you understood it. The approach you’re using is already defeating, in that it gives power to a force outside you, that’s supposedly bad for you, no matter what. Fine, you can win that statement, and I can stay in my lane, but a different approach wouldn’t be as bad. To put down those rocks in your arms, and seek a common ground.
You assume by my “end the fed” statement in my bio that I don’t “fully understand the situation.”
What makes you come to that conclusion about me?
And I was telling Yellen to “stay in her lane.” Not you.
Imagine a race, there’s an orange finish line, but many screaming discouraging remarks by the sidelines. Some things are meant to be known, but not clung to as actualities, like inside jokes. It is impossible to serve two masters, and the “fed,” on the sidelines, plays two parts in a single role. The “hidden hand that shaped reality,” and the discouraging chants. However, the rules of the game of life are unchanging, like a walk in a forest remains that. It’s just that in the human realm, everything is upside down, and thus the orange paradise beyond the finish line, is deemed a bubble, and mere paranoia, since the racer, is made to focus on two things, on top of the goal. I hope this makes sense. It not only slows progress, but creates a negative outlook, and the energy needed to win, is wasted on other pursuits/distractions. Secretary Yellen is playing by the game rules, as her tweet shows, and as finance secretary, or treasurer, her role in the office is as the tweets suggest. Now, who is not in their lane?
As requested, I gave you an example of where you assumed something about me.
I guess this is you admitting as much.
And SecTreas should not be opining on NatSec. I stand by that statement. Her opining about the IRS is in her lane, but that was not my comment.
I admit to nothing. You agreed that the assumption was fair. A reflection of you.
National security, and finances go hand in hand. Perhaps she is in a tough situation. All these things are besides the point. How can improvement, and lament go hand in hand? How can bitcoin supporters not hold grudges, but argue their case from a rational, non emotional base of operation?
Where are nuclear arsenal US was first to take from Ukraine? If you plan to stop “funding endless wars” do you also have plan first to fix ALL OF YOUR mistakes?
Short answer: no.
Long answer: if funding a war (causing unintended consequences) fixes some previous mistake, then I’ll choose to *not* fix a previous mistake by creating new problems.
The US has made the world dependent on their military, probably on purpose. Which now puts them in a no win situation. Defend everyone, you get endless wars (current situation). Defend yourself, the world complains that the US isn’t defending them properly.
Totally self created problem, I agree. The best path forward in my opinion is not to defend everyone. It doesn’t seem like a peaceful path.
The nukes were given voluntarily to the US by Ukraine. They didn’t want the soviets nukes, they traded them for protection. This endless protection is the point of my post.
So in short your suggestion is let rusia genocide 40 millions of citizens of my country because a long time ago your country madd a lot of mistakes which affect your life (inflation mostly) and you are tired with this and don’t want to be responsible for past liabilities?
P.S. nukes were actually taken by force because there were disastrous consequences if we won’t in short
There is no end to this. After we help you stop Russia, *then* can we stop?
Blame Russia, not the US.
The US is not the aggressor.
PS - Ukraine signed away their nukes.
*taken by force* is different than *signed a treaty*.
A treaty that Russia also signed and is in violation of. Russia is the enemy here, not the US.
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-ukraine-give-nukes-russia-us-security-guarantees-1765048
US is one of the best Ukraines ally. But you want to make it something different because you are tired of responsibility
And btw, do you really believe those are “regional conflicts” and while your neighbors are kind Canadians and working Mexicans — you are fine having prosperous life, better than before even if your allies burn in fire because of having wrong neighbors? And those “conflicts” never touch you?
Do you really believe in this and don’t even think that those “regional conflicts” are actually protecting you?
You sound like a mouthpiece for the military industrial complex.
I have answered your question.
The end game of your position is just more and more war. There needs to be a better way.
The end game of my position is myself alive, my family is alive, my friends are alive and my country exists
The only answer to this is weapon unfortunately, which I also hate. But there is no other way irregardless of how much people far away would like to dream, period
Re: “kind Canadians”
Don’t Canadian people benefit from our defense of Ukraine also? So are they “tired” of paying as well, or were they never responsible in the first place?
As a percentage of tax revenue, which country helped out Ukraine the most? How about the least?
What more could you possibly ask for? We have spent more on your country in real dollars than protecting our own southern border from an invasion.
“Southern invasion” 😂😂😂😂 I have nothing to say
In reality this is a war started after WW2 between democracies and dictatorships. So, yes, Ukraine and Israel are just examples of countries having active war actions right now making other countries free of spilling their blood
Interesting dichotomy you paint for the US citizen. Pay us money and weapons or you’re a genocidal murderer.
I don’t accept either side.
Do you ask the same of Canadian citizens? How much have they provided?
I never said this. I’m saying that this is only illusion to believe that it will stop on Ukraine. rusia gets Ukraine, then Eastern Europe, then gets all former USSR republics, then Iran gets middle East and China gets Asia. And then its just a matter of time when this this banner stops being a local joke (it says Alaska is ours)
Canada made a lot, there is huge Ukrainian diaspora. There are Latvia and Lithuania who put HUGE amount of their GDP into Ukraines support (which is understandable since they are next if Ukraine falls, however of course its peanuts comparing to US part with a miserable GDP part). I don’t understand what you are looking for here? US support is big. But its not only one. Other countries combined made MUCH more than US actually. But the main point here - democracies all-together here in this fight, even though today its UA and IL sacrificing their lives, before it was Sakartvelo, Moldova and Ichkeriya, tomorrow it could very well be US if we don’t unite in time 
I don’t think “as a percentage of GDP” is a good metric, because our GDP will never pay off our debt.
So we literally can’t afford to send money for your border *unless we print more money and dilute (tax the citizens twice) the currency even more.* <—— this is what I disagree with.
If WW3 comes to our doorstep, then I may change my mind, but I reject your premise that *this* Ukraine invasion is the beginning of Putin march to world domination.
How much of your GDP will you provide us if WW3 comes to our doorstep? Probably less than we’ve already given. It’s easy to tell the other guy to keep funding infinite dollars forever, but you wouldn't agree if the roles were reversed.
I hope you never get into my situation, but I would without thinking change all my income streams in order to return at least what we had - say, nukes and other heavy equipment. And there are more than 50% of Ukrainians thinking the same after 2022
I can’t answer how would I feel if I would be in your situation without actually understanding what is war. Maybe I would take the same position as you. I also was pretty blind between 2013 and 2017 when war was 100km away from me but I didn’t feel it and believed it never touches me. Now I just view a lot of things differently and trying to share experience of my errors which could help others
P.S. I assume you not only want to avoid printing money in order to support Ukraine, you just want to distance out, because if money is a problem you could just sent troops in order to meet Budapest memorandum liabilities :) but money is the least of help
P.S.S. If GDP is not an indicator for you, take another example - while US sent millions of dollars in water and shovels in the first months Poland sent a couple of hundreds of tanks which in dollar equivalent are peanuts but in survivability terms are MUCH more valuable
Are you saying the US has not met the Budapest liabilities?
Not “during the first few months “, I mean to date.
All Budapest memo signers broke it in Feb 2014 and it hasn’t changed till today. In fact it became useless even though:
1) Ukraine didn’t break it
2) Ukraine didn’t receive back anything what it exchanged for it
If you want to argue about philosophical differences between “a promise”, “a guarantee” etc in a document signed decades ago by different generations - then dictatorships already won
If you don’t believe a random guy ok the internet - see how entire countries react to that kind of “promises” — Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia give Ukraine ALL they can because they understand they are at the biggest risk. Poland on the other hand stocks up weapon as mad and increases army reserves because it can afford it. Why do they do it? Because they love Ukraine and war? Or because they understand Article 5 has very high chances to become next Budapest memo?
So by that measure look which country gave more than any other? The US. Yet it’s still not enough.
You claim we reneged on the deal, but gave more than any other country.
When is enough enough? I know the answer, it will never be enough.
The addiction to US aid has no end. I realize it’s because the US set it up this way, but you can still realize the addiction and the desire of current people like myself to draw a line *somewhere*.
Realize also that I am one, very unpowerful citizen. So you’ll get your money, tanks, whatever you desire for the duration of this endless war, since the military industrial complex runs our government.
I’m expressing my desired outcome, were I king of the world.
Are you kidding? When there is agreement, there is a clear enough. If you want it to sound easy, then according to Budapest memo “enough” is when Ukrainian sovereignty is restored at 1991 borders. Is this clear enough?
Thats actually your country (therefore YOU even if you don’t like it) — obligated to guarantee in terms of international laws. We ask MUCH less. You are dancing to give NOTHING.
If you want to be unreliable partner, say it directly first
The mental gymnastics is strong with this one 🤸♂️
Mandibles & Sovereign Individual
> the wealthy tax cheat pay
They played by the rules. The rules are "pay the rule maker and don't pay more taxes. The issue isn't clever wealthy people but an overly complex system only the wealthy can afford to game.
Also, anything above a 10% income tax is ridiculous. What's our ROI? Wars. Bad deal. Let's go back to war bonds that require the cooperation and consent of the citizenry.
Bingo