Little Rants
Re: Little Rants
Charlie Kirk advocated for being gaslighted and following teachings that were intended to brainwash generations of people towards ideologies that were antithetical to ethical treatment of anyone more than the so-called 'Author(s)' of the book(s).
It's a circle jerk of self-defeating ideologies, where advocates to tribalistic thinking can get deindividuated people with brain rot to obsequiously prostrate themselves before the pillar, of those like Charlie who existed vicariously through the verboten texts, echoed through religion or "good" sounding ideas which always has a gray area that proscribes antipathy towards actual "empathy," hence why he conflated the pretense of "sympathy" and it's expression which connotes a socio-cultural hegemony of fakery to appear outwardly sacrosanct, while being sycophantic towards the "Leader" or whomever they seek approval from; forgetting that within their self-serving interests, that a palimpsest has eked itself out through the pages and managed to be forgotten as to the origin of the source material--the age old iteration on previous ideas that they rob the identity of--forgetting their "greatness" is only as good as attrition hasn't caught up, or entropy, with their existence.
Hammurabi would have a word with Charlie Kirk, and perhaps would scald his tongue with a hot iron, though I don't believe Charlie cared for transparency and was merely a grifter for easy score points where no one can have a say in edgewise.
How many people succumbed to the torture and emotional abuse of such people; those who considered their relationship transactional--trauma-bonding with their "maker"--and having a superficial relation and being complacent with a false-sense of security.
The racists and sexists statements that Charlie Kirk is known for suggests, that the times he was a "good" person can easily hemorrhage when you contrast it with his bad ideologies.
The same lies regarding employment statistics are the same lies he perpetuated about immigration (since no one was around to document or deport, he pretends like he's reversing the data that is shown on people that cross the border, when the only real reason "so many" were "flooding the country" is because Biden actually had accurate reports done instead of putting his head in the sand, while actually doing something about the issue, rather than exploiting the vitriol and hate to game the grift wagon towards whatever populist ideology was convenient for him.)
Trump Inherits Better Southern Border Situation Than He Left Biden
https://www.newsweek.com/southern-borde ... rt-2019770
Charlie Kirk believed that Trump was doing the right thing with immigration, when it's very apparent that he isn't, and his "base" has more in common with the "sundown towns,"
Charlie Kirk advocated for armed violence when the political theater no longer represented "them" (and who are "them" is the crux of the argument, since anyone with bias can selectively filter through their own desired wish-fulfillment.)
Re: Little Rants
I've missed this place darnit! Time to participate more. 
ENTP
Being nice is the only real rebellion left — and it’s a hell of a lot cheaper than therapy.
Being nice is the only real rebellion left — and it’s a hell of a lot cheaper than therapy.
-
HighlyIrregular
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2021 2:20 pm
- Formerly: BarIII
Re: Little Rants
Non-smoking apartment buildings that have a barbeque area and are near highways. I don't even want an apartment that has a gas range.
...just saw one with fireplaces!
...just saw one with fireplaces!
Re: Little Rants
When posting on the topic of Starbucks firing employees and closing down around 900 stores:
"Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol earned approximately $95.8 million in 2024, which is 6,666 times more than the average employee."
**
A response from someone who's profiles shows he was a Manager at McDonalds (and Wendy's) :
"if your[you're] mad at the rich for being rich[,] you’re mad at the wrong person[.]"
***
My response:
You need a further understanding of how exploitation occurs.
The Executive Pay Cap That Backfired (basically Bill Clinton wanted to restrict excessive CEO pay but they just funneled it into CEO stock options; hence why Steve Jobs was ("only. . .") paid $1. . . (it wasn't because he wanted to leave money on the table for his employees and growth.)
https://www.propublica.org/article/the- ... -backfired
His response (which received a laughing emoji from someone from Sweden and never elaborated.)
"you can only be exploited if you allow it…once again, if you’re mad at the rich for being rich, you’re mad at the wrong person"
***
So you believe so fully in what you are saying (which I believe, implies that YOU are to blame for not being rich?) So why aren't you "rich?"
You apparently worked for McDonalds, so you "should know" that Ray Kroc was only successful with the franchise when he decided to lease the property land to the franchisee, which meant that any unsuccessful property debt would be incurred by the property owner.
Subway likewise would compete with independent franchisees with their own corporate owned stores--so why is this--and shouldn't it be considered illegal, similar to racketeering?
Why do large corporations have loopholes that are completely unatainable by individuals; and then when the government attempts to restrict unfair advantages that run people out of their livelihood, corruption and grift becomes commonplace, to the point that "no one is listening."
So what did you conclude after "presumably" reading that article, in which you decided to ignore? Is it not evident that a CEO whose salary is tied to how much he can get away with (including tax advantages) and likewise the manipulation of profits and costs to a store, are far more appealing to them within short term, than whether or not their own associates who are loyal to the company get to maintain their measly pay they've accumulated out of so many years with inflation double-screwing them?
Not to mention, Starbuck's coffee sucks, but people will just continue to reward corporations for screwing over the farmers (in what they believe to be slave-like conditions) that grow beans, only for them to over roast the heck out of them so people don't recognize how bad it actually is.
And then again, absolutely none of this is new to society and it does go back to how labor has always been exploited for thousands of years (though I'm sure if you were honest, you would know that?)
***
I followed-up with something that seems to confirm what I was saying (though I'm sure the idiot is one of those MAGA fluffers that doesn't understand this part.)
While I'm on the topic of McDonalds.
‘The Game Was Rigged’: Former Black McDonald’s Franchisees Say McDonald’s Set Up Their Businesses to Fail, Now They’re Calling for a Boycott
https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/09/28 ... s-to-fail/
***
His response:
i mean, no one can hold you back except you, yourself…if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at the wrong person
My response
It seems those black franchisees felt, that McDonalds was holding them back; intentionally, for that matter. I guess image is more important than authenticity towards the goal post.
Any grifter can claim they possess knowledge and intelligence, but the reality is most often very different from how they pretend. .
His response:
if you’re mad at the rich for being rich, you’re mad at the wrong person
My response
Just a thought. . . Is inductive thinking so rare that people are incapable of doing anything more than regurgitating their staid mentality?
You really think that the people that are rich aren't their because they had certain access to advantages not attainable to many people, and just happened to correspond to the anti-hero myth they so often project?
You can look a the background of Warren Buffett (who lived right down the street from Coca Cola executives; hence why Politicians are also WAAAAAY MORE SUCCESSFUL at stock trading than even Warren Buffet is, because they have connections) or circumstances dealing with funding, such as Jeff Bezos having startup backing from his family, or Elon Musk pretending like he wasn't just a grifter.
Though I don't expect you to elaborate.
*** A HUGE COLOSAL WASTE OF FUCKING TIME! ***
The fuckwad:
"you think you’re making a point, you’re not doing anything but sounding like a whiner…if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at the wrong person (don’t try to use the same argument against me, my point is if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at ur wrong person)"
My response:
A whiner, who accuses other people of being "mad at the rich" rather than acknowledging the obvious problem that you seem incapable of understanding; nor are you capable of elaborating on.
And the "if I kept my dogecoin instead of being so pissed off at the evident grift of Elon Musk, I would have been a multimillionaire when it was 35,000% what I bought it for" doesn't phase me one bit, even if I probably "could" use more money.
When the very system that exploits enables for people that are literally "inhuman" (which has an increasing depreciation of the meaning as humanity continues to plague this planet,) continue to fester and destroy whatever is meaningful, I will at least have some respite that I didn't contribute to it.
****************************
Adding:
https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
A lot more than just one graph.
Worth mentioning, this is mostly in reference to the transition to fiat currency replacing the gold standard. Some believe that history will look back at Nixon's speech about this transition as one of his greatest follies.
"Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol earned approximately $95.8 million in 2024, which is 6,666 times more than the average employee."
**
A response from someone who's profiles shows he was a Manager at McDonalds (and Wendy's) :
"if your[you're] mad at the rich for being rich[,] you’re mad at the wrong person[.]"
***
My response:
You need a further understanding of how exploitation occurs.
The Executive Pay Cap That Backfired (basically Bill Clinton wanted to restrict excessive CEO pay but they just funneled it into CEO stock options; hence why Steve Jobs was ("only. . .") paid $1. . . (it wasn't because he wanted to leave money on the table for his employees and growth.)
https://www.propublica.org/article/the- ... -backfired
His response (which received a laughing emoji from someone from Sweden and never elaborated.)
"you can only be exploited if you allow it…once again, if you’re mad at the rich for being rich, you’re mad at the wrong person"
***
So you believe so fully in what you are saying (which I believe, implies that YOU are to blame for not being rich?) So why aren't you "rich?"
You apparently worked for McDonalds, so you "should know" that Ray Kroc was only successful with the franchise when he decided to lease the property land to the franchisee, which meant that any unsuccessful property debt would be incurred by the property owner.
Subway likewise would compete with independent franchisees with their own corporate owned stores--so why is this--and shouldn't it be considered illegal, similar to racketeering?
Why do large corporations have loopholes that are completely unatainable by individuals; and then when the government attempts to restrict unfair advantages that run people out of their livelihood, corruption and grift becomes commonplace, to the point that "no one is listening."
So what did you conclude after "presumably" reading that article, in which you decided to ignore? Is it not evident that a CEO whose salary is tied to how much he can get away with (including tax advantages) and likewise the manipulation of profits and costs to a store, are far more appealing to them within short term, than whether or not their own associates who are loyal to the company get to maintain their measly pay they've accumulated out of so many years with inflation double-screwing them?
Not to mention, Starbuck's coffee sucks, but people will just continue to reward corporations for screwing over the farmers (in what they believe to be slave-like conditions) that grow beans, only for them to over roast the heck out of them so people don't recognize how bad it actually is.
And then again, absolutely none of this is new to society and it does go back to how labor has always been exploited for thousands of years (though I'm sure if you were honest, you would know that?)
***
I followed-up with something that seems to confirm what I was saying (though I'm sure the idiot is one of those MAGA fluffers that doesn't understand this part.)
While I'm on the topic of McDonalds.
‘The Game Was Rigged’: Former Black McDonald’s Franchisees Say McDonald’s Set Up Their Businesses to Fail, Now They’re Calling for a Boycott
https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/09/28 ... s-to-fail/
***
His response:
i mean, no one can hold you back except you, yourself…if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at the wrong person
My response
It seems those black franchisees felt, that McDonalds was holding them back; intentionally, for that matter. I guess image is more important than authenticity towards the goal post.
Any grifter can claim they possess knowledge and intelligence, but the reality is most often very different from how they pretend. .
His response:
if you’re mad at the rich for being rich, you’re mad at the wrong person
My response
Just a thought. . . Is inductive thinking so rare that people are incapable of doing anything more than regurgitating their staid mentality?
You really think that the people that are rich aren't their because they had certain access to advantages not attainable to many people, and just happened to correspond to the anti-hero myth they so often project?
You can look a the background of Warren Buffett (who lived right down the street from Coca Cola executives; hence why Politicians are also WAAAAAY MORE SUCCESSFUL at stock trading than even Warren Buffet is, because they have connections) or circumstances dealing with funding, such as Jeff Bezos having startup backing from his family, or Elon Musk pretending like he wasn't just a grifter.
Though I don't expect you to elaborate.
*** A HUGE COLOSAL WASTE OF FUCKING TIME! ***
The fuckwad:
"you think you’re making a point, you’re not doing anything but sounding like a whiner…if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at the wrong person (don’t try to use the same argument against me, my point is if you’re mad at the rich for being rich you’re mad at ur wrong person)"
My response:
A whiner, who accuses other people of being "mad at the rich" rather than acknowledging the obvious problem that you seem incapable of understanding; nor are you capable of elaborating on.
And the "if I kept my dogecoin instead of being so pissed off at the evident grift of Elon Musk, I would have been a multimillionaire when it was 35,000% what I bought it for" doesn't phase me one bit, even if I probably "could" use more money.
When the very system that exploits enables for people that are literally "inhuman" (which has an increasing depreciation of the meaning as humanity continues to plague this planet,) continue to fester and destroy whatever is meaningful, I will at least have some respite that I didn't contribute to it.
****************************
Adding:
https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
A lot more than just one graph.
Worth mentioning, this is mostly in reference to the transition to fiat currency replacing the gold standard. Some believe that history will look back at Nixon's speech about this transition as one of his greatest follies.