Just a Commoner

The problem with the No Kings Rallies is they aren't aware the King isn't the current POTUS, it's Billionaires and Capitalism.

Vladimir Putin🇷🇺 delivers a reality check on de-dollarisation: ‘To use the dollar as a tool of foreign policy struggle is one of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the US political leadership…you are killing the US dollar with your own hands.’ The war on Iran only accelerates the move to de-dollarisation. Not only has the US dollar been weaponised for years… But now the US is increasingly seen as an unstable rogue state, ready to tank the global economy with no qualms about instability. The shift away from the dollar will continue, as the dollar is increasingly seen as the currency of an out-of-control, declining rogue state.

@e_galv As if Trump going would change anything

Liberal Americans have been conditioned to believe protest is polite, funny, respectful, performative, and above all else, nonviolent. The most violent government in the world is not going to relinquish power due to a fucking message made of people on a beach.

I’ve never seen such a disconnect between the commentary on this site and what I hear in the real world. I’ve talked to dozens of normal conservatives in real life about the Iran War and I haven’t met a single one who’s actually enthusiastically in favor of it. At best they’re warily optimistic. In most cases they’re opposed. In some cases they’re not only opposed but deeply furious. And yet here if you utter a word of criticism about the war you’ll be shouted down by throngs of alleged American conservatives who allegedly have wanted nothing more than for America to go to war with Iran. It just doesn’t reflect what I see on the ground. That’s not just cope because my position is unpopular with “my side.” I’ve held plenty of unpopular positions. I really don’t care. But in this case the social media vs real world divide is stark and unlike anything I’ve seen before.

@_0xghost_ You really think the empire would let one dude decide how to spend trillions of dollars? No, it wouldn't. This did not happen "because Trump thought...". This happened because the deep state wanted it to happen. And if the global economy crashes, that was on purpose.

Here’s the entire set of unfortunate circumstances of how we found ourselves on the verge of another GFC: 1. Trump was misinformed, he thought Iran was another Venezuela, he would blow up the regime & ppl would overthrow the rest of the govt 2. As a result, he never thought through the rest of it 3. He never game theoried the possibility of Iran taking over the Strait of Hormuz 4. Iran is in control now bc they have a stranglehold on huge percentage of global energy shipping & are destabilizing the region & petrodollar 5. TRUMP thought he could TACO himself out of the situation like he did with the tariff talks & other business deals 6. This is not a business deal, Iran is dug in, has been betrayed countless times, sees this as an existential war, their final stand & now that they have the upper hand, they aren’t negotiating anything 7. Only way to resolve this is through force, which will be the 2020s version of Vietnam 8. Iran is fighting a different kind of war, they don’t care how many casualties they have, this is do or die for them. Their mentality is more like kamikazes or those Japanese solders who were still in the jungles 30 years after the war was over. Point being this war isn’t judged by casualties or damage- Iran is willing to take more pain. 9. In summation, this is a global financial crisis, end of American empire kind of war, which America has gotten itself into unnecessarily by a leader who thought it would be over in 3 days, didn’t think it all through and thought he could manage it like a real estate deal.

@SMO_VZ @STANISKRAPIVNIK @MarioNawfal Love Stanislav

STANISLAV KRAPIVNIK @STANISKRAPIVNIK , schools Mario @MarioNawfal on the Russian - IRANIAN relationship Beware : NOT for the Faint Hearted x.com/i/status/20309…

MS NOW bodyguard tackles a man for calling to defund Israel on the sidelines of a No Kings rally Perfectly captures contemporary liberalism

@hype_joshy11 @JamieAA_Again Pretty sure Jamie isn't making money on this thesis as it contradicts the immensely profitable medical industry... And, I've followed him for 2 years and never seen him sell a single product.

@JamieAA_Again The only intelligent anti-vaxers are the ones at the top who make money off it, like yourself. They are not intelligent for the centuries-old claims they adopt as their own work, but rather in the ability to make so much money off unintelligent people incapable of fact checking.

There were attempts to gather Doctors and Medics during the Scamdemic together to fight tyranny under one umbrella like The Great Barrington Declaration. Whether intentional or not these organisations made the critical error of starting with an assumption there was a pathogen/pandemic in the first place. The net result of these groups is they amounted to nothing. It is great to see Doctors like Kirk renouncing ties to groups like these as the truth emerges about what really happened in 2020.

Much of the point of "No Kings" is to stuff people back into their partisan boxes.

It just got worse Breaking: UBS Bank has stopped withdrawals from its nearly $500 million real estate fund for up to 3 years UBS Bank now joins other asset managers such as BlackRock, Ares Management, Apollo and Blackstone

Here's the thing. We handed Trump everything. On a golden platter. We gave him the House. We gave him the Senate. We gave him the greatest comeback victory in political history with a popular vote never before seen in a presidential campaign. We fought for him. We believed in him. Many of us lost friends. Lost jobs. Lost FAMILY over our support of him. Many of us have dedicated more than a decade of our lives to him in the hopes of seeing him succeed. Some even spent YEARS in prison. Some DIED for the cause. Only to be lied to. Used. Betrayed. So I don't particularly give a fuck what any of you MAGA cultists out there who are too stupid to realize how badly you've been played think of me. I don't think of you at all.

France is saying more than a third of gulf oil infrastructure is GONE. We still have markets operating as if this will be over soon and we'll pivot to the next flavor of the month. People have no fucking clue what has ALREADY been done to the global economy in a few short weeks.

They’re just such pieces of shit man. They want the war and the mass death but they want Trump to take the blame. Reprehensible, evil people

The US has surpassed China and North Korea in Death rate from malnutrition

The US financial oligarchy launched a coordinated campaign to reduce Social Security benefits this week. The effort will lead, sooner rather than later, to significant cuts in benefits, reduced eligibility by raising the retirement age, and privatization of all or part of the massive program, which currently pays benefits to 68 million Americans, most of them elderly and retired. There is bipartisan support for such measures, demonstrated in the joint proposal by Republican Senator Bill Cassidy and Democratic Senator Tim Kaine to establish a $1.5 trillion market-based supplement to Social Security. This and other possible measures were discussed at a Senate Budget Committee hearing Wednesday, at which federal officials said that the Social Security Trust Fund reserves would be exhausted between 2032 and 2034. That means the Trust Fund would only be able to pay out as much as it takes in from payroll taxes, a shortfall they estimated at 28 percent. The demands for major restructuring of Social Security began with a letter to shareholders in BlackRock, the world’s largest investment fund with $14 trillion in assets under management—twice the annual budget of the federal government, and nearly half of total US Gross Domestic Product. Larry Fink, the billionaire CEO of BlackRock, told shareholders that the financial crisis of Social Security was coming to a turning point, and he endorsed the bipartisan Cassidy-Caine proposal, which amounts to attaching a privatized fund to Social Security, as a Trojan horse leading to full-scale privatization. While conceding that Social Security is “one of the most effective poverty-prevention programs in history,” Fink wrote, “The issue is: Social Security provides stability, but it doesn’t allow most Americans to build wealth in a way that grows with their country.” Translated into plain English, Fink is expressing the frustration on Wall Street that it cannot lay hands on the trillions in the Social Security trust funds and extract profits from them. On Tuesday, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a corporate-backed bipartisan think tank, issued a plan to address the financial crisis of Social Security by capping annual benefits at $100,000 a year for couples retiring at the normal retirement age, currently 67. Single retirees would face a cap of $50,000. Those who retire at a younger age would face an even lower ceiling on benefits. The number of couples currently receiving more than $100,000 a year from Social Security is tiny—estimatedat 0.05 percent of all recipients. The CRFB cited that fact to argue that the proposal was “radically progressive,” applying to only the wealthiest retired couples. But depending on how the ceiling is indexed, inflation will rapidly increase the number and the ceiling would rapidly become a major factor in holding down benefit payments for large numbers of retirees. The CRFB plan was hailed in the lead editorial of the Washington Post, published the same day, under the headline, “Nobody needs over $100,000 per year in Social Security benefits.” The editorial claimed that capping benefits “would help restore sanity” to the program, adding, “a wealthy retired couple receiving nearly six figures from a national pension program is absurd. A more typical maximum public benefit for a retired couple in the developed world is between $30,000 and $40,000.” The editorial goes on to argue that “Capping benefits is a better way to reform Social Security than increasing revenue.” This is a deliberate lie, since the simplest—and by far the most popular—proposal to save Social Security is to eliminate the income ceiling on the payroll tax. Currently, all income above $184,500 a year is exempt from payroll tax. CEOs pay Social Security tax on that amount only, no matter how many millions they take in during the year. The vast bulk of ruling class income, taken in the form of dividends, capital gains and other forms of financial plunder, is not subject to Social Security tax at all, which is applied only to payrolls. The owner of the Washington Post, longtime Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, has a fortune currently estimated at about $224 billion. Over the past year, he has drastically shifted the newspaper’s editorial line, from a mild liberalism to a raging “free market” libertarianism, combined with rabid anti-communism and militarism in foreign policy. His editorial stenographers apparently see nothing provocative about declaring in a headline that no one needs $100,000 a year in Social Security benefits, while the boss who dictates their editorial line makes $100,000 every 90 seconds. The average US worker makes about $137 a day. Bezos’s wealth increases each day by approximately 700,000 times that amount. These numbers illustrate the obscene social inequality of capitalism. Moreover, despite the claims that an income of $100,000 a year makes a couple on Social Security wealthy, that figure is a bare minimum income for survival in New York City, San Francisco and Seattle, while just adequate in cities like Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia. And for the retired widow or widower living in any of those cities, an income cap of $50,000 means poverty, plain and simple. wsws.org/en/articles/20…

@JeremyWard33 Does this mean you only want to save liberals from pissing in jugs at Amazon, not conservatives? I used to be a leftist. This kind of post is exactly why I am no longer a leftist.

Florida, USA: Peak Idiocracy achieved

Today our Judiciary Committee will vote on HR 8037 to give exemptions for DATA CENTERS from environmental regulations. I’ll vote No, because no industry deserves special treatment under the law. If the regulations are too onerous, repeal them for everyone.grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5…

@BrilynHollyhand Nobody cares about either of you nerds because nobody believes in politics anymore. There is no right and left. There are satanic pedophiles and transnational capital raping the population and will continue to do so until a revolution comes. Not voting our way out of this.

Think about it. If the U.S. Empire didn’t want to push the Blame Israel narrative, would Candace Owen and Tucker Carlson be allowed to have such a huge audience?

@DanielLDavis1 Yo, Daniel. We are already destroyed as a superpower.

General Hertling here is making very astute observations, and asking all the right questions. It is clear from his line of reasoning, that either the administration has no bloody idea of what it’s doing, and it’s going to deploy a light force to do something that has no staying power, or, as the general wonders, this is only the “opening gambit“ of an intent to deploy a larger force. If it’s the former, we’re screwed, because those small number of troops will be chewed up peace-meal, and accomplish nothing. If it’s the latter, we’re even more screwed, because then we’re repeating all the worst steps of Vietnam, and we’re going to end up in a massive quagmire, that could eventually destroy our status as a global superpower.