Lurker > TaZa92

A CEO catches his executive assistant stealing tens of thousands of dollars from him. Instead of turning him in, he allows the executive assistant to pay him back over time as he can while keeping his job. The assistant decides to murder him and dismember his body anyways.

https://heavy.com/news/2020/07/tyrese-devon-haspil/

Terrible. RIP Fahim Saleh. The guy was doing a lot for developing nations in Africa and Asia.

---

hi

Joeydollaz posted...

103 watching nowPremiere in progress

Yeah but it's not actually live. The video keeps cutting to different points as well (same cameraman).

---

hi

Wait this isn't even live - it's something called "Premiere" where the uploader can allow all viewers to watch together at once for the first time or something.

When was this actually filmed - yesterday?

---

hi

The US has developed the most pharmaceutical drugs and provides them for discounts to basically every other nation (because we all pay so much for it here lolol) so that should be considered the best thing we do

---

hi

DEKMStephens posted...

Thanks man

lolol

I didn't want to directly quote him from the video because he says a few offensive things, but generally he gives his opinion on how his fellow black Americans should act within their communities to better themselves.

---

hi

The Trent posted...

remember when he cried 9n air when Cuomo got the rona

no o.O - but he was probably being authentic that time if he did

---

hi

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

Thumbnail has some dweeb in a Trump T-shirt making a dumb face.

pass.

lmao I didnt even notice what he was wearing

Anyways for those who dont want to watch:

-Don Lemon says some things that would 100% get him fired on CNN today. The way he talks was offensive even back then in my opinion. If he wanted to make a point he couldve said it more professionally for sure.

The main point is to see how quickly media outlets will change their narrative based on what will bring in the money and how people on both sides of the political spectrum buy it up.

---

hi

https://youtu.be/k27qpQdV-Qk?t=124

If the above URL doesn't take you to the correct time stamp just go to 2:04.

It's just weird to see because his viewpoints are very different. Do you think he actually changed his beliefs or is he now just doing what gets the views for his network (like everyone else in media smh)

---

hi

Were_Wyrm posted...

marked

>_>

---

hi

Weren't they called Indians in the first place because Columbus thought the natives in the Americas simply looked like the Indians in India?

literally racist af


---

hi

Just make it based on a metric that's some combination of the individual's parents' household income while they were growing up, and the average amount of violence that occurred in the neighborhood(s) the individual lived in as well while growing up.

That way:

• Affirmative Action will still primarily help out underrepresented minorities (URMs) by using the metrics stated above
• Underrepresented minorities who would have gotten into a specific college, or be hired for a specific job, regardless of affirmative action would no longer face additional discrimination where people assume they "only got to that position because of the color of their skin"
• Everyone, regardless of their political affiliation/leaning, understands the above metrics are objective measures of hardship and cannot complain
• Over-represented minorities and white individuals who grew up in poverty would no longer be overlooked compared to a URM with a wealthy background/family. Yes, the URM faces more systemic racism when compared to the former, but the URM in this specific case faces less overall adversity due to their affluent upbringing. This is also one of the biggest points people will bring up against the current system, and it would be solved by the method I mentioned.

College admissions already takes in to account parents' household income level to an extent, but this would further expand that piece and also be used on the level of job applications.

It's a great improvement IMO; I can't think of any real counter points.

---

hi

There's a video but I won't post it here for respect of the two individuals that were hit.

Here's a source: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/505846-2-women-hit-by-car-on-seattle-highway-closed-for-protests

Summary: Basically, it seems the highway was supposed to be closed but a vehicle got around barricades somewhere earlier and was driving down. It appears he didn't see the protesters and attempted to swerve last minute but it was too late. The two individuals hit are in critical condition at the hospital.

---

hi

TC by your logic shouldn't the money come from descendants of former slave owners if the payment is only to descendants of former slaves?

I understand that you may be thinking "well the entire USA benefited off the back of my ancestors", which is true, but the general idea of reparations specifically is now paying for the actual work that was performed for no pay, and no ability of freedom, by your ancestors.

That means your 14 trillion number becomes even less possible.

---

hi

ssj3vegeta2 posted...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez would utterly destroy dat other chick

tell us how you really feel vegy

---

hi

imo would be more entertaining than any upcoming presidential debate

---

hi

Antifar posted...

Thank you, TC, for being the last non-troll

I'm not gonna lie like 10-15 years ago when I was really young I was probably one of the biggest trolls on CE (under another username).

It's like everything has come full circle.

---

hi

..in a literal troll universe.

This goes for both sides of the political spectrum.

I've mostly just been watching what's been going on but it's getting worse. People read whatever they want and use their emotions to make claims, people won't admit when they're wrong, people won't admit that the other side is probably partially right at least, etc.

Like literally everyone has to be trolling at this point and they're in too deep so they can't stop.

---

hi

TheVipaGTS posted...

Hes ok with that. Go ahead and drain his hard earned tax dollars for that. But dont you dare give the medication to a poor person who is just trying to not die. Thats socialism and the worst thing possible.

I agree the system as a whole needs some fixing but I saw some points in your post and other posts and wanted to address them (I'm not right or wrong either way but I'm interested in some rebuttals):

• No one who actually needs the drug will die due to being unable to afford the drug. They will certainly get the drug regardless if they personally can pay for it or not but yes it is unfortunate they may have to foot a larger bill afterwards in some instances.
• A lot of you are mentioning that Americans are all about profit and looking out only for themselves. Are you aware that a lot of the drugs we have today are because Americans pay so much for our prescriptions? Biotech/pharma companies make investments into attempting to develop these drugs, because they know the ones that are successful will make huge profits in the USA. They can't charge as much in other countries because those countries tend to have intermediary organizations to negotiate lower prices for their citizens, or the citizens of that country can't afford higher prices so it'll be sold for much lower. Basically, the US citizens wind up footing the bill for these drugs so those in less wealthy countries can get the drugs they need.

So for the point I addressed in my 2nd bullet point, are you okay with lower prescription costs but allowing those in developing nations to not receive the drugs they need for cheaper prices? Sure, the "rich corporations" are selfish to an extent of course, but are we not also selfish ourselves for wanting cheaper prescription drugs for Americans if the result is less drug development and higher costs for a lot developing nations?

---

hi

Lanzol posted...

Yes I'm so glad we have endured this economic system where 1% of people has as much wealth as half the country and you have people dying in the streets

People dying in the streets is obviously terrible but the system itself is set up to ensure that people shouldn't be dying in the streets. If you are poor enough you'll get enough social assistance to have a place to stay and get back on your feet.

The toughest part to address is those with mental health issues who technically also have a place to stay but if they don't have a family unit to take care of them I don't think the government can force them to stay somewhere.


---

hi

Apparently its fixed now

---

hi

I did some very quick research (so correct me if I'm wrong):

It seems California somehow had Affirmative Action removed recently (or possibly being voted on being removed in November?) and the argument against Affirmative Action was that it violated these words in the constitution; so by removing those words they have a better chance of having Affirmative Action re-instated.

Also California is trying to re-structure their college admissions because they essentially believe too many kids of Asian decent (Chinese, Indian, etc.) are filling up their schools (...I'm not joking).

Affirmative Action has good intentions obviously, but in my opinion it should be focused more on poverty / income level during your upbringing.

---

hi

I think she genuinely believes in the majority of things shes says but she also will go out of her way to support Trump because she knows certain media outlets will give her more attention for doing so.

---

hi

Im in the northeast (US) and apparently mosquito season is going to be extra bad this year due to an expected hotter and wetter summer

---

hi

Which state are you TC (assuming you're in the US)

---

hi

Whenever I get hiccups that seemingly last forever I always think of that guy had apparently had them for around 70 years straight and hope Im not next

---

hi

TC we need more videos since they're infinitely more clear than the photos.

Also you are doing a great job sir.

---

hi

BlingBling22947 posted...

Would you be surprised to learn that the origins of these tests are racist?

I'm sure whatever original standardized tests were introduced definitely had underlying racist intentions, but the modern day standard tests attempt to best judge the ability of predicting students' success in college.

The biggest issue is those who come from less fortunate socioeconomic backgrounds are at a disadvantage, but if you remove standardized testing then the remaining factors provide those same less privileged students with an even larger disadvantage.

Think about it, without standardized test scores admission boards have to rely more on extra-curriculars and such to evaluate candidates; obviously those with wealthier backgrounds will have the opportunities to be involved in more extra-curriculars. In this day and age you can really just utilize the internet to study for any standardized test. Sure, tutoring and paid services will probably help more, but standardized tests can at times be the only way for a student from a poor socioeconomic background to level the playing field.

tl;dr: I'm saying removing standardized tests might hurt those from less wealthy backgrounds even more than leaving it as it is.

---

hi

Order them in terms of preference

---

hi

TC you need to keep that damn kitten still while taking pics

---

hi

KINDERFELD posted...

I'm impressed because games tend to look a lot better than unreal engine demos by med-gen.

Just check out how ugly this video now looks compared to the average PS4 game.

https://youtu.be/tn607OoVoRw

Are you saying the PS5 could actually have games that look like the Unreal 5 demo :o?

---

hi

DundiesAward posted...

Depends on area. In order to reopen in NY the area has to meet 7 metrics. Finger Lakes, Mohawk Valley, North Country, Southern Tier are set to reopen. Everywhere else such as NYC don't as of today. If you want more info this article is accurate as of today with what the areas that don't meet the criteria yet are missing.

https://tinyurl.com/y9pflenl

Here is what NYC is missing for example...

As of Wednesday, the city's new hospitalization rate was about 2.66 per 100,000 residents, well above the required 2. The share of open hospital beds (28%) and ICU beds (24%) also remained below the mandated 30% for reopening.

This is a really good resource - thank you.

---

hi

Any word on NY state and specifically NYC lockdowns? It technically ends in 2 days but I haven't heard any new information specifically other than "certain regions may be re-opened"

---

hi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC5KtatMcUw&feature=emb_title

but seriously how long will it take games to look like this - like 2025? Also do you have examples of last generation demos of this caliber that never came to fruition (other than Ubisoft games)

---

hi

Isnt getting more teeth extracted not conducive to expanding your mouth

---

hi

According the below the US hit an all-time high of single cases in a day with 36,000 today:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

Is this accurate or some retroactive reporting done from previous days?

---

hi

TC we need more pics of your kitten

---

hi

The Nintendo Master posted...

Except that every living creature there is capable of killing you

This is the worst thing about living there tbh but I heard that if you're living in the large cities themselves then it shouldn't be as bad.

I still would not want giant spiders and snakes showing up in my house even if they are the non-venomous kinds.

---

hi

Lived in the state of New York my whole life and I work in NYC. I want to perhaps eventually move to Australia permanently one day.

I do like New York and NYC (there's a lot of good but also a lot of bad) but Sydney/Brisbane/Melbourne all seem amazing.

I'm leaning more towards Sydney/Brisbane because sunny warm weather is a big deal for me and Melbourne seems to have the craziest most bi-polar weather I've ever heard of.

Give me some advice CE.

---

hi

Obvious C here - way too much hype.

There are maybe 2 really good episodes and the rest are slightly above mediocre. People are acting like it's the greatest documentary they've ever seen because of the outrageous cast.

---

hi

PIITB415 posted...

My base salary is 180k. I'm no where in the middle ground. So I'm confused.

Are you married and filing your taxes jointly? In that case does your significant other make less than $20k a year?

---

hi

New Zealand is a free market economy and I'm pretty sure AOC is against that so how would that work

---

hi

boxington posted...

isn't this the plot for that one Black Mirror episode?

Feline_Heart posted...

No, I don't want Anthony Mackie to have sex with me

I may or may not have watched that BM episode recently

---

hi

You scared?

---

hi

gamer167 posted...

Look just because youre not getting shit from your broke ass family when they die doesnt mean other people need to pay for it.

This policy wouldn't even benefit me (not anymore at least). It's about trying to reduce (undeserved) income equality and making people more so work for what they have.

---

hi

pls debate me I'm bored and stuck at home 24/7

---

hi

Sabram posted...

Most people, when they get older and have kids/grandkids, are not as selfish as you seem to be. Also, what items are double taxed on an individual level? Not counting anything in the process of sales of good further back than the customer purchasing them

I would want to give as much money to my children and grandkids as possible as well; that's still a bit selfish though since I'm looking out for my own. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, just pointing out the flaw in your argument.

The point is, this is about the ones receiving the wealth. There would probably be a time buffer from an announcement of such a policy to the actual implementation so people who have been working for a while with the intention of handing over their wealth to their children would still be able to do so. Eventually, everyone will be under the understanding that what you earn is primarily for yourself and providing any inheritance will result in a massive tax.

---

hi

Assuming this is based on my topic I'll provide these answers:

1. People should be able to keep a rightful amount of what they earn themselves. We should NOT increase taxes on regular earned income (except probably a little higher at the very top), but tax inheritance since those receiving the income did not technically earn it.
2. True, they will search for loopholes to purchase goods that hold value and/or buy items in the names of their children and have their children immediately flip for a profit. We have (or will have) the necessary tracking systems to prevent such loopholes. Those who didn't buy the initial item themselves and sell it for a profit should pay a tax on the entire value rather than just the profit.
3. I'll restate this: everyone has the right to their own money that they earn themselves. Inheritance has only furthered a massive income inequality that has no justification since the individuals receiving the money did nothing themselves to simply "deserve" it.

---

hi

Sabram posted...

Fully disagree. A lot of the motivation for people to work hard, climb corporate ladders, and have good investments isn't just for greed, a lot of it is for retirement and to leave for their kids/grandkids.

I can understand having a high tax on multi billionaires, but folks who make like 250k a year definitely shouldn't be taxed that high.

Plus as stated above inheritance tax is literally a double dip, and imo should be illegal

1. People would still have their money for their own use. It would encourage them to use more of it for retirement and themselves. I think most people would still work just as hard to earn money for themselves and provide for their families and their children are growing.
2. I mentioned earlier I was being extra extreme in my original post to draw more attention. There would obviously be a minimum limit prior to this kicking in.
3. There's plenty of existing examples of "double-tax" already.

---

hi