Закреплённый твит
Matthew
554 posts
Matthew
@mathachoo
Work in progress following Jesus. Trust in the power & goodness of God. Eventually, I will publish my novel. We're having a good time.
Modesto, CA Присоединился Ağustos 2025
122 Подписки59 Подписчики
@JeffBezos I can support this, except the old adage "No taxation without representation" should work in reverse. If you don't pay taxes, you don't get to vote.
English
Yes, the United States has the most progressive tax system in the world. The top 1% pay 40% of taxes, the bottom 50% pay 3% of taxes. We can make it even more progressive by zeroing out taxes on the bottom half. It’s a small amount of the total tax revenue but very meaningful to people in this group.
Shay Boloor@StockSavvyShay
Jeff Bezos said the bottom half of Americans should pay zero federal income tax. He cited a nurse in Queens making ~$75K and paying ~$12K in taxes saying “we shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington.”
English
@mathachoo @xwanyex Except Biblical law allows for people to be forced to become lifelong, chattel slaves. There is no law against it. The law does not allow you to use a knife to kill someone. So there is no misuse going on here.
English
@mathachoo @xwanyex And some people just were forced to become a lifelong chattel slave. Nothing wrong that I guess
English
@Rohanburdened @xwanyex Rohan, I will answer your troll question: surely you agree that sometimes people deserve beatings, correct? Some men learn no other way.
Generally you would only want to beat someone to death if that person did something deserving of the death penalty.
Do you disagree?
English
@mathachoo @xwanyex Do you think that the discipline and authority you think is sometimes needed includes beating people? Like to the point they might die in 3 or more days (but not 2 or less) ?
English
@sabrdance @romanhelmetguy I don't see how feudal land management is comparable to monopolies in a market economy. If industries throughout history have trended toward monopoly, I ask for notable examples that exemplify the trend. If economies naturally trend toward monopoly, it should be obvious.
English
@mathachoo @romanhelmetguy Other monopolies form because the necessary precursor capital can be cornered -this is basically how feudal economies worked, with the lords monopolizing both the land and most of the machinery, such as mills. They *could* resort to violence to maintain it, but usually didn't.
English
This is her dumbest take. Monopolies form naturally. Monopolies are much more profitable than competitive industries. So if you find yourself in a competitive industry, it makes sense to buy out or collude with all your competitors, or to temporarily take a loss in order to drive them out of business. The government itself is a naturally-forming monopoly on violence. Ayn Rand is frequently guilty of this kind of magical thinking in which everything would be perfect if the government just disappeared. Well, there are still large parts of Africa today in which there is effectively no government. Is it utopia? Meanwhile the Industrial Revolution could not have taken place without the financial incentives put in place by intellectual property law such as patents, which require an incredibly strong government to enforce. The right really needs to get away from this whole “everything the government does is bad” loser mindset.
Sowell Economics@sowelleconomics
Ayn Rand: "Under a free system, no one could acquire a monopoly on anything. If you look at economics, and economic history, you will discover that all monopolies have been established with government help."
English
@romanhelmetguy But your main point, in the first paragraph, was that monopolies naturally arise in competitive markets. Can you please provide examples of that? It seems to me that monopolies are exceptional in history, not commonplace.
English
@mathachoo Sure, Aristotle tells us that Thales of Miletus secured a monopoly on all the olive presses and made a fortune.
English
@martianwyrdlord Good tweet except that young earth creationism is true.
English
I was trying to warn my colleagues about this like a decade ago.
Most people do not have the time or expertise to evaluate every single peer-reviewed study that enters the scientific literature. Therefore they apply simple heuristics. Until recently the rule of thumb was "the guys in lab coats know what they're doing, you should probably trust them."
Then the guys in lab coats started abusing that trust in the name of global warming, fighting racism, making money from pharma, and dozens of other social engineering projects and outright scams.
It was very obvious to me that this would destroy trust, thus leading to a new heuristic: "the guys in lab coats are probably full of shit, you should be suspicious of everything they say."
Which then leads at the extreme end to Moon landing hoax theories, flat Earth, young Earth creationism, and other nonsense. It also leads to less public support for science funding, because why would anyone want to pay for an ideological priesthood that can't produce anything but a replication crisis?
el gato malo@boriquagato
you're villifying the wrong people and arguing by false equivalence, simon. people still trust science, they just do not trust "science imposed upon them by experts at the point of a gun." no one is saying "airplanes don't fly" or "computers don't compute." they are saying "you lied about climate change, epidemiology, trade offs with products like roundup, GRAS designations, nutrition, race, gender, and 500 other topics>' and many of these criticisms have validity. and in response, the experts blame the questioner and demand deference. and those who refuse to engage on facts rarely have the facts on their side. trust was lost because "the experts" proved not only untrustworthy, but outright dictatorial. they faked evidence and data, made up wild pseudoscientific theories, and vilified sound science, and pushed utter fakery in its place. they censored opposition and claimed "the science was settled" to prevent investigation into their frauds. and they forced the whole world at the expense of lives and trillions of dollars of lost welfare to play along. it was high handed, dishonest, tyranny. have you stopped to consider that they earned this loss of faith? because they did. MIT wrote a literal article about "anti mask twitter" which it vilified by claiming “most fundamentally, the groups we studied believe that science is a process, not an institution.” as though it proved we had somehow turned our backs on science. but we did not. science is and must be a process. it is never an institution. that's dogma, not the methods of bacon. we did not stop trusting science, the experts stopped performing it and were dancing around in the flensed skinsuit of scientific method that they had stripped from the bones that made it valid: dispute, dissent, replication, validation - open and honest discourse. if you want to win back trust, you need to restore open debate and engagement, share methods, means, and data. wailing about "they won't trust us!" and blaming the folks who called out the deviation from sound science is just another arrogant presumption for institutions to dictate doctrine. you want to respect for sceince? start respecting to process of science again.
English
@Aurelianus_1 @mightydudbolt Considering her roles in Black Swan and Closer, I guess Natalie Portman conquered her fears in that respect.
English
@mightydudbolt She was also dead against taking even slightly sexualised roles after her issues when she was a kid , so it's a Gem that we got this and it was done with glee on her part .
English
If you think about it, it's pretty amazing that George Lucas managed to secure the most attractive woman alive as his lead actress in the prequels, proceeded to make her act opposite a CGI lizard named Jar Jar Binks, and then personally designed this outfit for her and convinced her to wear it. Meanwhile some of you are afraid to even talk to a mid barista.
doomer@uncledoomer
they stopped making new attractive women so we have to repost pictures of the same 5 chicks from 20 years ago
English
@shagbark_hick This suggests that parents have the daily obligation to prove their innocence to the state.
English
Say what you will about public schooling, but at a minimum, at a public school there is a process by which abused children can appeal to outside parties.
When it comes to families homeschooling on isolated estates, you really never know what's actually going on out there.
Again, I'm not "anti-homeschooling" per se, but these are the kinds of things that homeschooling advocates are going to have to have a serious answer for as homeschooling continues to grow in popularity.
Kathryn Lea@Kathryn_Lea
@DassCoool @LexLiberty76 @shagbark_hick I experienced violence every day I was homeschooled because my parents beat the shit out of me for hours. I learned pain equals love and endured years of abusive relationships because of it. And I couldn't even get away from it for an hour. No one to tell. Fuck homeschooling.
English
@EibokG58268 @darwintojesus A worldview is how you see the world, the lens through which you interpret things. For example, if you deny God & spirits exist, then no one is judged after they die. No justice.
Did you know the principle of eye for an eye comes from God? It originated in the Hebrew scriptures.
English
@mathachoo @darwintojesus "God will judge" 🙄 I don't have a "world view", I have a personal view and it is very much rooted in an eye for an eye.
English
Sympathy is a trait, an ability, and evolution determines if you get it or not. It has nothing to do with being moral on your view. Judging a person that doesn’t have sympathy, on atheism, is like judging a person for being mentally handicapped. At most it’s a genetic disorder, and if anything YOU should have sympathy for them (because they’re disabled).
Think about it.
Atheistboi@athiestboi
If you need religion to have human sympathy you’re a bad person.
English
@EibokG58268 @darwintojesus Christians believe in justice, while atheists do not.
In the biblical worldview, God will judge every sin. In the end, the scales of justice will be balanced.
In the atheistic worldview, injustices are never punished. Victims do not receive justice. Evil has no consequences.
English
The heroes of Christians are all those that have murdered and raped, but who asked for forgiveness. To you guys, the murdered old man or the raped daughter was just the god's perfect plan, to save the murderer and rapist. A godly achievement But you want to teach us the path to a moral life 😡 You can f right off. .
English
@SpaceWoot @JoelWBerry @CosmicSkeptic Believing in an eternal universe that exists of its own power turns the universe into a deity. I suppose that represents the ultimate form of materialism.
English
@JoelWBerry @CosmicSkeptic Clever one as well! I love these thoughts BUTT, both analogies fail when you consider there is no cause of the universe. You make the assumption it was created. What if it just is and always was. So:
-Infinite universe needs no Dad.
-Crimeless crime requires no criminal?😂
English
I’m getting a lot of hate for this reel. What do you think?
(P.S.: if you say “but we have evidence for dads I believe you have missed the point.)
English
@BrandonTheAdams @dr_owenanderson Someone who is small & developing is still a person. Personhood is not dependent on size.
I suppose for someone to deny the personhood of babies in the womb, they would have to deny that the unborn have spirits and/or souls. Do pro-abortion people also deny that spirits exist?
English
@dr_owenanderson “The baby.” Your overactive kin selection is showing. Is a zygote a baby? What about an embryo? A 10 week old fetus? At what point does the fetus have a “perspective”? Is that where you draw the line? Because that’s probably a lot later than nearly all abortions take place.
English
One of the feminist professors I work with showed her class a sympathetic video following a woman through the decision to have an abortion and then through the procedure. A student asked if she will show a video from the other perspective. The professor said she doesn’t need to because they have a reading from the pro-life perspective. The student said, “no, I mean from the perspective of the baby being killed.”
English
@CynicalPublius Not to mention that the Roman church has waged war many times throughout its history. Competing Popes used to raise armies against one another, for crying out loud. Does the current Pope condemn those previous Popes in the same way he judges 2026 USA and Christians generally?
English
Your Holiness, as a cradle Catholic and devout follower of the Church, respectfully, can you please tell me:
1. How does your post comport with the teachings of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Just War?
2. Would you have condemned the Centurion? (Luke 7:1-10).
3. Was the USA wrong for liberating Nazi concentration camps in World War II?
I know you have millions of followers and likely will never even see this, but if you somehow do read what I wrote, please know that there are literally millions of American Roman Catholics (and American Christians from other denominations) who are deeply puzzled by your comments and would appreciate an explanation.
Pope Leo XIV@Pontifex
God does not bless any conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs. Military action will not create space for freedom or times of #Peace, which comes only from the patient promotion of coexistence and dialogue among peoples.
English
@johankrkn @MattWalshBlog To be perfectly frank, we don't need to try to understand the inner workings of every murderer's mind. We need to enact justice. Surely we can interview criminals before they are executed, and the science may continue. But priority one ought to be that justice is served.
English
I am totally radicalized on the issue of criminal justice. We should increase executions by like a thousand percent. Bring back hard labor. Bring back corporal punishment. Bring back public lashings. Bring back public hangings. Our ancestors were right about all of that.
English