Hardkill

Mearsheimer is saying that Zelensky never should've tried to join NATO. He warned Ukraine and NATO for many years not to agitate Russia by constantly expanding NATO eastward.

Well, Professor Mearsheimer has turned out to be right about these matters more so than the mainstream media analysts have been. I know that Leo doesn't always agree with him on some things, but he still considers Mearsheimer to be one of the best experts on military/foreign affairs. That being said, Leo said before that pundits like Mearsheimer tend to overdramatize the problems the Western world has and like to sound contrarian. But I don't get why he's greatly blaming Zelensky and Ukraine for the hell they are in. I mean, maybe Zelensky did make the mistake of not trying to keep his country a neutral territory, but there's no way that he as well as all of Ukraine deserve so much blame for "starting this war" and for suffering immensely from it.

I am shocked that Mearsheimer went as far as to say that Zelensky is to be blamed for failing to protect Ukraine, should step down, and that that will be legacy:

I didn't say that my dad necessarily did much better than the market. However, most investors have failed at it, especially those who are self-taught because of lack of proper education & strategy, emotional trading & poor risk management, overtrading & high transaction costs, not enough starting capital, and the market can be brutally competitive. Yes, his main strategy has always been the buy-and-hold strategy with serious stocks and keep riding the wave no matter what happens. Fortunately, for people like him who started seriously investing in stocks around 2009, our country went through the longest-running bull market in US history (March 2009 to March 2020), then went through an extremely sharp, but extremely short 2-month bear run, followed by this current near 5-year bull run. Besides, My dad practically taught himself and has been doing all this work on his own since 2009. Unlike Warren Buffett or other brilliant investors like him, my dad never had direct personal mentorship or formal finance education. He built his knowledge purely through self-education (reading books from top investors, not being personally taught by them). Moreover, ever since 2009, he as never relied on financial consultants or experts, even after becoming successful. Also, there's nothing inherently wrong with massive money printing, especially when the economy is in a serious downturn.

That's interesting.... Are you more supportive of Ukraine because of how much the country has already been suffering for almost 3 years now? Wouldn't that be the opposite of what Professor Mearsheimer and Noam Chomsky have been saying NATO should have done long ago—that is, having the U.S. make a stronger effort to negotiate a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine? Also, it is becoming increasingly clear that Ukraine can't win the war, Russia has kept taking more and more land from Ukraine slowly but surely, and the longer this war continues the more territory Russia will keep gaining.

I will say that my dad used the 2008 financial crisis as a major opportunity for buying a lot of solid stocks while learning how to invest in the stock market in a serious pragmatic way for the long-run. He became so successful at it through hard work, discipline, commitment, street smarts, reading books on it by real gurus like Warren Buffett, learning a lot from real experts about the economy, etc. that he made our family much more well off financially than ever before with no serious debt at all over the past 16 years. His trading strategy has still kept making us more and more money every 1-2 years. In fact, if it wasn’t for his amazing success at it, then my family and I would probably be living paycheck to paycheck and/or had to leave California.

You'll come to sorely regret that. Just like how most Americans who voted for Bush deeply regretted voting for him. Even most Republicans and conservatives to this day have said "You know, looking back I think that Bush was a total disaster. He was a bad leader who didn't have a clue about how to run the economy and his handling of military/foreign affairs, especially with the wars in the Middle East, in the end were a terrible mistake. I can't believe I was a Bush supporter."

Sorry OP, but quite frankly you don't deserve any empathy from anyone on here for that. What you did wasn't just a big mistake. You made a truly abominable and truly stupid choice. I applaud you not only for being openly honest about that but also for realizing that what did was such a grave mistake. However, this is something that you are going to have to live with for probably the rest of your life. Elections have consequences. Voting has consequences. Selfishness has consequences. The next step for you is to now take a serious hard look in the mirror and start to question a number of things in your mind: 1. "Why did I really believe that such an absolute monster who already ruined our country before as a failed president was better to have as POTUS than someone like Kamala Harris was who was eminently qualified to be president, much more in her prime, and had serious economic plans for improving people's lives? 2. "Why didn't I do serious research on all of the great things Biden, Harris, and the Democrats accomplished and how well they genuinely governed during the Biden presidency instead of listening to the lies and brain rotting misinformation from right-wing media sources like Fox News or the Daily Wire or Alex Jones?" 3. "Why didn't I before think to myself 'What would some other great president in modern US History like FDR or Obama say or do?" 4. "Why didn't I believe in the real facts put out by real news sources such as NYT and MSNBC. 5. "Why didn't I listen to left-wing media outlets such as Pod Save America, BTC, Democracy Docket, Politics Girl, Majority Report, and Allan Lichtman"? 6. "Why didn't I listen to top independent economists like Paul Krugman or Mark Zandi about how the economy works, real economic policies, and what a president and his/her administration are able to do to manage the economy?"

I guess we'll have to wait and see if he really goes through with these tariffs, eventually.

A typical example of Trump making a grand promise, but then doing something that's the opposite of that. According to top independent economists if Trump really implements his entire tariff plan, then the average American will have to spend about $2600 more from their pocketbook and/or from their business revenue. Also, this move ironically contradicts the decades-long Republican principle of promoting the free market. Tariffs are a form of government intervention that can disrupt private enterprise. This approach is the opposite of Reaganism, which emphasized free trade. Trump is trying to implement an outdated idea used by conservative Republicans like Coolidge in the 1920s and McKinley before that. Their tariff policies had severe negative consequences, particularly with the Smoot-Hawley tariff, which worsened the Great Depression.

That's a really good question, OP. I believe it's because white-collar workers have never felt the need to have a union for their respective fields. Historically, white-collar workers have generally enjoyed better compensation, benefits, and working conditions compared to blue-collar workers. According to Meta AI: Factors contributing to the lack of unionization among white-collar workers: Higher wages and benefits: White-collar workers have typically received higher salaries, bonuses, and benefits, making them less inclined to seek collective bargaining. Perceived job security: White-collar workers often have more job security and stability, reducing their need for union protection. Professional identity and autonomy: White-collar workers often identify strongly with their profession and value their independence, making them less likely to seek collective representation. Lack of exposure to labor abuses: White-collar workers have historically been less vulnerable to labor abuses, such as wage theft, unsafe working conditions, and unfair labor practices. That being said I think there really should be unions for white-collar employees. Why not? After all, there's always the possibility that even very high-skilled workers who are very well-educated and have a high ranking job can still subjected to various kind of labor abuses from their employees. In fact, with the advent of AI, white-collar workers are more likely to be negatively impacted by the AI revolution than blue-collar workers are. Therefore, may need to form unions more than ever before.

Damn, I am really sorry about that, OP. Definitely keep us posted to let us know how you're doing. You can PM if you want.

This media environment we are in will really be the death of us all. If no one or no agency fixes this whole media problem before it's too late then it could spell the end of America and maybe the whole world.

Another heartbreaking disaster. I can't imagine how horrific this must have been for all of the victims and how much their families and closed ones are now suffering from this.

You know, I am now kind of open to the possibility of that. I am seeing this guy talking about it in more large left-leaning shows: However, I am still skeptical about it because if what that guy is saying is true then why haven't the major voting rights organizations such as the Lawyer's committee or the LDF brought this up as well? Also, in some blue states like New York, Illinois, California, and Massachusetts Democratic voter turnout decreased and Trump made some significant gains in each of those states when comparing 2020 to 2024.