volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
Well that's simply not true.
Democrats voted to put us in this situation in the last Congress against Republican descent. Republicans voted against the appropriations pledges that got us here. Meanwhile, Republicans voted to get us out of it by cleaning up the mess by voting to extend borrowing powers.
The political spin that you are promoting here is just not factually accurate.
GOP candidates are already taking on Trump.
Anyone interested can tune into conservative media any day of the week to see it.
Headlines like this come across as gaslighting, though really I guess they're just clickbait.
What specifically are you referring to?
Because in general Thomas seems to be on the other side of the ledger.
Well keep in mind that the Treasury is an executive branch department.
It's all up to the president to default, which I would say would be an impeachable offense since the Constitution is very clear that he has to pay obligations as they come due.
That has nothing to do with Congress, that is purely the other branch of government, the executive branch.
@SuperTapani@newsie.social
I think you are missing that the executive branch is the branch of government who gets to decide what to do with the treasury, not the legislative branch, and it is currently held by a Democrat.
The extreme right does not hold the executive branch at the moment.
I mean there are very real state level issues that should not be federal and the first place
Ah. Well that's a stupid thing for you to say, and now I am being offensive because I suppose you are just that not interested in discussing anything.
I give up.
I mean a president can claim whatever authority he wants to claim, but we have a system of checks and balances specifically set up to make sure presidents don't unilaterally do things like this.
No, Biden does not have authority to issue debt without going through the Democratic process.
Should he attempt to do so, that would be an impeachable violation of the rule of law.
@gwfoto@newsie.social
GOP forced default? The GOP is the only group who has approved extra borrowing authority to avoid default!
It's so backwards to say the ones providing that solution are causing a problem.
The treasury is part of the executive branch, so it's really up to Biden whether to default in the face of the GOP offramp
This misses that they are not spending laws. There are appropriation laws, while it is the executive branch spending throughout the year as authorized, not ordered, by the legislative branch.
That is a crucial misunderstanding in the US system of divided government.
And so the treasury in the executive branch has the money to pay these debts seeing as Congress cannot obligate the executive branch to spending.
That makes all the difference in this controversy.
@jonradioV4@mastodon.world
No that gets it completely backwards.
The president doesn't get to choose to invoke the Constitution. The Constitution requires presidents to pay the bills. There is no if. If the president were to decline to pay debts then he would stand for impeachment immediately.
All of these people talking about invoking the 14th Amendment, no there is no invoking. The president has to pay debts. It's not like there's a choice.
The Treasury brings in enough money to pay for those debts. According to the daily treasury balance sheet they have the money regardless of the debt ceiling.
There is just so much political misinformation out there. We really need to push back against it.
My point is that it uses MORE resources though!
So my question is that, using more resources, what advantage does it bring? That's exactly the question I'm asking here.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to figure out what you are saying.
Is it that you did not realize, then, that it uses more resources to have single user servers?
It sounds like you are misinterpreting some things here.
No, my use of stupid isn't indicative of a goal of being offensive, I'm sorry you took it that way, I actually thought that it was general belief that this guy is one who does things that are counterproductive and such. I honestly didn't realize that you would be opposed to me saying Biden is stupid.
For so many people, across ideologies, that is just common shared belief.
Well that's a stupid thing for Biden to have said, just the latest in so many stupid things that the guy says.
The Constitution grants the Congress the authority to borrow money because it's such a big deal to obligate future generations to paying back debts of this generation, so it wants the democratic process to be involved in that idea.
If Biden believes that he has the authority to sell debt without legal authority, well, that would probably be an impeachable offense and he should be removed from office right away.
Biden can't subvert the democratic process like that.
Anybody buying US debt that was not legally authorized would be buying nonsense.
The problem is that it doesn't matter what the president wants to be true, he does not have authorities that he does not have.
Should Biden try to sell debt that was not authorized by law, then whoever buys that debt will be buying Monopoly money, and the US would have zero obligation to actually pay it back, so it would be really stupid for anybody to actually buy it.
I mean I would also think it to be impeachable for a president to engage in such a scam, but that is a secondary concern.
Yeah my complaint/criticism is just that the user interface talks about privacy toward this audience or that audience while the user will be unaware of that any audience can potentially see the content.
And if I didn't say so above, the issue is that I have also talked to a lot of individuals who are very surprised to find out that they were misled about how the privacy works here. So this is not just theoretical, this is actually what is happening.
I just really wish the platform could be more transparent about how it works.
I think that is on the right path although there are some technologies that can balance security against convenience.
The thing that always comes to my mind is that we have all of these solutions that academic computer science figure it out decades ago, I keep thinking of the '70s, that just didn't make it into prevalent usage in all of this time, that just didn't get implemented in user facing applications.
We know how to secure things. We just don't. And that is frustrating to me but it is what it is.
I don't think that answers my question as to what advantage there is to single user instances.
I'm not trying to be belligerent or anything, I am honestly asking what you have in mind.
@jonradioV4@mastodon.world
I mean SCOTUS might be the final umpire, but we can all see with our own eyes that the president does not have that authority. The Constitution is clear.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
