Robert Kennedy Jr.
- Thread starter snarlcakes
- Start date
Totally. I can't imagine voting for that guy who lost to that guy. Muy embarrassing.Imagine voting for that guy.
The new woke argument - Democracy is always hanging by a thread.
What a bunch of snowflakes.
But making up a Russian collusion hoax to influence the 2016 election and then handicap the Trump administration, having the FBI bury the Hunter laptop story to rig the 2020 election, using the FBI and DOJ to convince Twitter, Google, and Facebook to censor anything that's negative towards the Democrats, illegally changing election laws, and indicting the 2024 Republican nominee over a noncrime while the current President gets away with all sorts of major felonies is not a threat to Democracy.
Imagine someone who is so utterly naive and/or stupid that they're still defending Don the Con.Imagine voting for that guy.
Dbm. We can’t hold the line any longer. We just. Keep. Losing. It’s embarrassing how badly the Dems own trump. Can we please let him go. Back Kennedy. Anyone else
God save the Queen, man.
OMG has he no shame? This could effect how that scientist interacts with other furies.
Oops. And people still don’t understand why so many Americans support people like Trump and RFK. Our government is so corrupt it’s beyond belief.
We've already been over this. That isn't corruption, it's just an accounting error. Even @stollcpa, who would never, ever defend this administration without very good cause, said so. Why not trust your local, reliably conservative professional accountant, instead of some random Twitter idiot?
Oops.
Holding U.S. Treasurys? Beware: Uncle Sam Can't Account For $21 Trillion
The DOD and HUD can't account for $21 Trillion and the accounting profession has given the government the ok to engage in even worse accounting. If you're holding U.S. Treasuries, think twice.
www.forbes.com
And we went over all that when it happened during the Trump administration. None of this is news.Oops.
Holding U.S. Treasurys? Beware: Uncle Sam Can't Account For $21 Trillion
The DOD and HUD can't account for $21 Trillion and the accounting profession has given the government the ok to engage in even worse accounting. If you're holding U.S. Treasuries, think twice.
I have no idea if governmental agencies have some goofy accounting methods. In the real world “cost of goods sold” would never be based on replacement cost. It would be determined based on the cost of the goods in inventory. The number can vary based on different methods of valuing ending inventory.
Imagine voting for someone who thinks the Queen of England is still alive after attending her funeral. Sehr embarrassing.
So you're saying the Defense Department is inept when it comes to accounting for their assets?
Finally, some light......
Unbelievable.Oops.
Holding U.S. Treasurys? Beware: Uncle Sam Can't Account For $21 Trillion
The DOD and HUD can't account for $21 Trillion and the accounting profession has given the government the ok to engage in even worse accounting. If you're holding U.S. Treasuries, think twice.
But not to worry - they can create money whenever they need it.
Last edited:
Stoll, let's say a company decides to give - I dont know - some vehicles to a charity.
Can they claim the cost (to them) of the vehicles as a charitable deduction or the market value?
I'm not not trying to trick you - I'm just interested.
My wife's an accountant (passed the CPA, although she doesn't work in public accounting, unfortunately).
This is bedroom talk for us.
If you start droppin FIFO LIFO acronyms, I’m whippin someone’s ass
Double declining balance? Don’t even think about it
Individual gets to take market value. When the business gets done with all the entries they basically end up with tax basis as the deduction.
Therefore if they give a fully depreciated truck, the net of all the entries will be zero effect on the company’s net income.
😂 i was going to use LIFO and FIFO but decided it was a bad idea.
You can't give credence to people who are not scientists "debating" an actual scientist and spreading conspiracy theories which have no basis in fact. RFK Jr has no credibility to speak on a topic like vaccines causing autism. He's got no evidence or studies to support his claim, but because he goes on a forum like Joe Rogan (for example) suddenly millions of people who wouldn't know a scientific study if it bit them in the ass swallow his nonsense,and in many cases help to spread it...
When RFK was on Rogan last week he wildly claimed that wifi caused cancer. At first Rogan was skeptical, but after "researching" the subject on the Environmental Health Trust website (which is affiliated with RFK) Rogan became convinced within 5 minutes that wifi causes cancer. No evidence to support it, but Joe Rogan came away convinced by RFK. That's why debating RFK serves no purpose- many of his theories have been debunked repeatedly and he still peddles them. People even stupider than Rogan who hang on his every word (and harass a scientist at his home) are not going to be convinced because of a "debate".
Politicans debate- that's not what scientists do...
Btw, RFK's voice sounds horrible. He actually sounds worse than Biden, and he's considerably younger.
You can see the relevant clips regarding the wifi cancer claim at 7 minutes if you want to skip ahead. This guy does a real good job of debunking RFK conspiracy theories which btw his own family disown. But it's a pretty long video...
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Scientists disagree with you:
How Scientists Engage the Public
Most scientists (87%) believe it is important to participate in public policy debates. Almost half use social media to discuss or follow science, and nearly a quarter blog about science and research.
www.pewresearch.org
The format need not be a "debate." It can be discussion, where each party gets to ask the other questions, point out flaws and look at studies. That's how persuasion works in a liberal society, or at least how it is supposed to work.
Last edited by a moderator:
Scientists disagree with you:
How Scientists Engage the Public
Most scientists (87%) believe it is important to participate in public policy debates. Almost half use social media to discuss or follow science, and nearly a quarter blog about science and research.
The format need not be a "debate." It can be discussion, where each party gets to ask the other questions, point out flaws and look at studies. That's how persuasion works in a liberal society, or at least how it is supposed to work.
So what is this supposed 'debate' going to solve or prove?
First off a debate is typically when presenting a case to an issue, and no one on one side believes there is an issue hencefore there's no need to debate. It's like debating if the moon is made of cheese? I don't need to hear a conspiracy nut make a case that against a scientist. I'm not demanding that a 'debate' happen plus I'm 100% sure such debate isn't going to change any opinions.
If a madman believes the moon is made of cheese, well there's really nothing anyone can say to convince them otherwise now is there?
However you do give the wingnut an opportunity to score some blows, giving the crazy person credibility and therefore making things worse.. maybe.
Main thing is if people really want to be convinced, there are many articles debunking the anti vaxxer theory, particularly the autism claim.
No need for a big theater, just read.
Secondly this is catnip for conspiracy theorists as it's a difficult subject that's not cut and dried, with many trap doors to fall into the one guy who is looking for any doubt which they believes validates the opinion.
Hell see Aloha and Danc talking about classified docs. One guy has experience working with docs and the other is an internet dude who likes to argue and doesn't give a f about 'finding truth'. It's just an exhaustive black hole of argument tactics where Aloha not only has to know the topic, he has to keep Danc on topic and he has to rebuke all of his nonsensical twists and turns.... because he's not looking for understanding, he's just arguing.
In the end, both sides probably believe they 'won the debate' but in reality, Aloha risked 100 times more arguing with a guy who doesn't know the topic as well but will never concede.
That's the issue with 'debating' crazies.
We've seen it a million times.
Another great example was the back masking nonsense religious nuts were attacking the rock community with. Crazy religious nuts said that bands like Judas Priest were putting in backwards messaging and subliminal messaging which was leading to teenagers commiting suicide.
They brought in recording engineers and played each track of a master tape (as to actually do back masking it has to be on the masters) which literally proved the claim was nonsense.
Didn't change a thing. They just pivoted to, well Ozzy did it or now do this song or some alteration of a never ending argument to that to this day, there are still people who believe there are evil backwards messages or my favorite subliminal message on rock albums.
Point being, it's a one sided claim made by extremists who have already been debunked, they just refuse to believe it.
FYI, the moon is not made of cheese. There is actually no moon. We all live in a dome and the government is projecting an image up off of it.
Everyone does not know that. Dumbass conspiracy theorists think that. Keep on believing stupid stuff.
That’s old and it actually was an accounting error. We should be happy we caught it, but no . . .
My wife is a CPA and accounting is never part of bedroom talk. It’s not exactly exciting.
I’m sure she prefers when I talk about shooting missiles and guns!
He’s a Presidential candidate and it’s on the most popular podcast on the planet. Joe Rogan isn’t that scary.
Are you seriously liking this guy because he’s an anti-vax guy? Do you not know he was a Truther and a massive voter fraud conspiracy theorist in 2004? He’s also a Democrat otherwise. WTH do you stand for?
You voted for a brain dead idiot who spent more money than any President ever. Save me the the bullsh#t about vaccines. I don’t give two shits about JFK stances on vaccines. I care that the President has a logical fiscal policy and foreign policy.
I personally like DeSantis or anyone who is willing to cut the budget. Biden can go f#ck himself. He’s a disaster and the greatest threat to the U.S. stability is our debt issues. It’s not vaccines. Hopefully, that answers your question.
It's theater.
Again, a public debate is when people are making public choices like, should we support Ukraine? You know a topic that has a high degree of uncertainty for both and is relatively unproven.
You don't have a public debate wondering if the world is flat because it's proven, therefore there is no debate. The only thing that does is give the crazy guy validation unless they absolutely fail, but even then the crazy guy was seen debating the serious guy and therefore the crazy guy was taken seriously.
How about this, since it's entertainment how about RFK debates a liberal internet personality or another political participant like Marianne Williamson?
I'm guessing you're not into that because that won't give the validation that is being desired.
Biden's foreign policy has been pretty remarkable. He's economically kneecapped a century long adversary without costing us any lives and he's overseen the addition of Finland to be followed by Sweden into Nato, giving us strong allies along the eastern bloc that will have impacts for the next 50 some years.
Unless you are pulling for Putin. If that's the case then yeah, Biden's foreign policy sucks.
Lastly good news that's he's also created the most jobs in a first term. What are we up to....13 million? With the infrastructure jobs just getting started (over 36,000 construction projects) expect that number to keep rising.
He took over an economic disaster in the middle of a pandemic and has guided us out, avoiding a recession, balancing an inflation rate that was lower than other leading developed countries while not crushing market values so yeah....he's been awful.
Similar threads
