Corvus “Crow” Sheperd

@BasedMikeLee With absolutely no hyperbole intended, this woman should be removed from any position of power within the USA immediately. This is horrifying.

“World War Eleven” Yes, that was deadly

@VinnysCorner1 Dick Vermeil. Time to guess when, lol!

Without saying your age… Who was the coach of your favorite NFL team when you started watching football?

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans. Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable. Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale. Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné. Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut. À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol. Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée. Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit. Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie. Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle. Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère. Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision : "La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne) "La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek "Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

@EmilySm43 Lots. For $$$ and no education requirement, start with "Sanitation Engineer". If you can get your math and science up, I have so many it will make your head spin.

Anyone??

@Geniustechw And 1995 was over 30 years ago.

@Geniustechw Wow. Hard to believe how wrong she is here. I couldn't support myself without a roommate or similar until my 30's, and I'm Gen X. IOW, I was in my 30's "20 years ago". What fantasy does she think we were living? Did she read something about 1950 and think that was everyone before

Does she have a valid point?

@Geniustechw Also, we all knew "40-a-week" was the lowest standard back then. Especially if it was only weekdays, 1st shift. We all had parents, or the parents of friends, that were lucky to do only 45 on a Mon-Fri, 1st shift job.

@Geniustechw Has she ever watched a 90's sitcom or drama where the 20-something doesn't have a roommate or spouse? No? That's because it's been this way for decades. Go back and watch Friends, Scrubs, or whatever you want. We were not solo in 1995.

@its_The_Dr Wat? Don't worry, we never stop looking. You are still wanted by some of us, and still admired.

At what age?

@FBGreatMoments Kind of surprised how many people considered among the all-time greats are listed ... when they are already among the all-time greats. George put up amazing numbers, but never won. A single ring would have completely changed the way he was remembered.

@FBGreatMoments Jeff George.

Name a quarterback who would be viewed completely differently with one ring.

@BoboChesterfie1 @navyhato Meanwhile the tipped staff restaurant will both advertise lower prices while attracting superior staff. The best-of-the-best Servers will earn FAR above minimum wage and the food will show a lower price on the menu. This situation has been steady for a reason, and isn't stupidty

@navyhato Stop tipping. Let restaurants pay their employees a living wage. It they have to raise prices they will do it on a level playing field. If a restaurant opens featuring no tipping allowed, everyone would go there.

Why does the cost of food have anything at all to do with how the food is brought or served to you? Should people just tip 100% to avoid confrontation?

@BoboChesterfie1 @navyhato No, they wouldn't. People will go wherever the posted ("minimum") price is lowest wrt to quality and clout. The sitdown with no tipping has to pay their staff a FAR higher wage than the tipped staff ... who's staff will still earn less money (i.e. end up with lessor quality). ..

@Sohnie @libsoftiktok Brutal, but relevant comment for would-be "world-changers" in the West. Unfortunately, they will not hear Bezmeov's words. Further, they are self-assured they know better, and know more, than a man who lived through the reality of their thought-experiments. It is a sad ending.

Here's another compilation of unhinged leftists having mental breakdowns after another left-wing assassin FAILED to m*rder President Trump. We have to share a country with these violence-loving lunatics.

@deng_patrick @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 I'd like to use your reply as a commentary on politics in the US, and the disparity in reason among our parties. Would that be Okay with you?

@CrowSheperd @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 Damn I watched a whole documentary on wolves the other day from npr. I wonder if they were left leaning wolves 🤷‍♂️

FLASHBACK: Navy SEAL Team Six operator Matt Bissonnette exposed the truth that Obama personally delayed the bin Laden mission by 24 hours purely so he could attend the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The operation was locked in for a moonless night with perfect weather and air density. At Obama’s direction, it was pushed back one day. Temperatures spiked, lift dropped, and one of the stealth Black Hawks crashed inside the compound, exactly the risk the original timeline had been engineered to avoid. Bissonnette put it bluntly, Because Obama needed to hit the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The team already had razor-thin prep time after receiving the tip. That vanity-driven delay forced them to fly in suboptimal conditions, all so Obama could deliver cheap shots at Trump and play Lion King clips while operators risked everything. Mission success came despite the politics, not because of them. Bissonnette’s account lays bare the cost of putting Washington optics above warrior safety.

@libsoftiktok It is incessantly amazing how much this part of our nation opposes democracy at a fundamental level. Assassinating your opponent, whom you are incapable of defeating in a public election, is the defining characteristic of the anti-democratic view. Unbelievably obvious.

@breathex23 @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 But yeah, totally ... the Minneapolis Public News clearly has clearer and more accurate perspective of what happened in that mission. Can you read your own post in perspective and take your arguments seriously? If you want to call an decorated solider a liar, just do it.

@CrowSheperd @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 One guy on a podcasr...oh yeah seems legit A legitimate news source that gave sources with quotes from ppl in charge of the mission while verifying it with weather forecast.... Well the city is liberal so Im going to need more

@breathex23 @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 For reference, Matt Bissonnette, the guy in this video, won both the Purple Heart and the Silver Star for his part in the action described. He also wrote the book "No Easy Day" on the topic, and was sued by the US DoD for his disclosures in that book for $6 million.

@breathex23 @YoAdrianFacts @ImMeme0 "One guy on a podcast"? You mean one of the men who actually performed the assassination of Osama bin Laden vs. some local leftist news org? Your not serious, are you? The validity of source comparison is astonishingly awful.

@Remington556308 @Raw_Combat_ I'm with you, last punch was unneeded. Kid on the ground was no threat to anyone. Don't reduce oneself to the lowest standard witnessed. Bloodthirsty internet crowd should be ignored, nothing to gain here, everything to lose (including respect, dignity, & humanity).

@Raw_Combat_ I applaud the fight but the last punch wasn’t necessary. Yes, I know, but to bust the chops while he’s knocked out can get you 25 to life. Keep it gangsta, but know when to protect yourself from the law.

Dude Gets Rocked After Trying To Start A Conflict With The Wrong One!