I don't disagree, but I think that's there's a nuance here that needs mentioning.

Trump is a special case. Everything he does is some form of a grift. It's not hidden - it's completely transparent. Those who fall for it are ignorant by choice. If they choose not to examine it, or (more likely) to ignore what's in front of them, they are to blame.

The other politicians would have a different standard to meet because they would have fooled the people. Trump cannot be other than he is, and those who are fooled have chosen it.

Do I think it should be allowed? Of course not. I'm only pointing the finger and doing my best Simpson's Nelson.

Not to be judgmental... but every one of those investors who lost money on the Trump coin deserved it. Okay. Well... yes. Im being totally and irredeemably judgmental. Yeah, I'm judging. Whether it's sycophancy, ignorance, or stupidity, they deserved it. Am I supposed to do otherwise? They bought the Brooklyn bridge from a guy on a street corner.

Unlike your other listed disbursements, they're likely to actually get this. Unlike politicians, companies generally make good on their offers. That already makes this far more legitimate.

Well then, the best answer would be for them to offer to pay directly for upgrades to homes that would help mitigate the effects. Acoustic treatments for instance. And if those complaining were honest, they'd shake hands and get it done.

But most wouldn't use the payout for that. The assumption is that they can be bribed. Which is fine. Absent any legal issues, there's nothing inherently wrong with a bribe. The question then becomes what the cost is to buy off the complainer, not what it costs to enhance the property. Those are two completely different questions, and you shouldn't just swap between them.

They aren't trying to make the problem go away - they're trying to determine what it costs to get people to ignore it.

And I think that's a reasonable starting point. Nobody is forced to sign on. Forgo the offer and press for more, if that's your preference.

But, this being a charm offensive, refusing it probably not going to change the trajectory of the project. So there's that.

It's not lying if you believe it when you say it. And Trump is just bent enough that he believes these things while he's saying them. He's far less a liar than he is just broken.

Not true anymore. Hasn't been for a while. Better let that one go... it's an anachronism.

Neither can people. When groups emit and consume the same crap in a concentrated circle jerk bad things happen. You get pedo pizza basements and orange politicians.

I have no problem with supply and demand. I did take basic economics. You so wildly misunderstood my point that I'll have to simplify it. Why the demand exists at all is mystifying.

You can't make fun of the man through parody, because you can no longer extend his behaviour to the absurd to do so. Baldwin was only funny because he was accurate.

You Americans have to get a goddamn grip on your presidency.

Well... you can't generally use chunks of gold to buy those goods and services either.

To be clear I'm not pretending they are the same. I believe in gold as a store of wealth. Bitcoin mystifies me.i don't understand what the fuck any of it rests on. And I understand it pretty much too to bottom. I just don't "understand" it.

I'm sure Truman would approve.

Trump has a seriously sharp core set of feral knives in his toolbox. He is outlier good at a small number of things. It's wrapped around an astoundingly stupid core, of course. He's not smart in the global sense.

  But don't discount those around him. Many of these people are smart - and evil. Far more evil than their leader. He just "is". Callous malevolence is baked in, but it's not intentional. He doesn't care because he incapable of caring. They are intentionally evil. Truly terrible people.

In a way Trump is the most honest politician we've seen in a century. He cannot even pretend to be anything but what he is.

What percentage of your ham sandwich can be shit before you have to acknowledge it's probably actually a shit sandwich?

I don't think it has to be 51%.

I took the post to mean using Linux to build your own streaming unit.

Under that assumption, I'm suggesting it's a bad value proposition unless the act of futzing with the OS is the bit you like.

When most people watch porn, the fact that you do isn't really useful. The useful bit is whether you are willing to pay for it, and that's not gleaned from scraping your hdmi signal. That's happily given up by payment processors and sites.