The difference is that overdue bills under Biden were caused by Covid,
while overdue bills under Trump is a direct result of tariffs and the trade war.
It will become much worse, when the health insurance costs start hitting.

You are correct that Amy Klobuchar isn't the sharpest tool in the box.

Blaming a lefty for something he has obviously not done,
while looking away from the country going to shit.
Can you not see how you are losing all sense of reality?

They'll have to do better, or it's the end of Ford, in at most two decades.

Individualism means the opposite of solidarity. It means you're on your own,
no communities of people helping each other in a time of need.
It is sold as freedom, but it actually strips the thing that made humanity prosper.
Yes, it is creating mental illness, to push people apart, like your movement is doing.

Is this all you had to say about that?
I was talking economics mostly. Got anything to say about that?

Who is prospering when the economy is doing well? Not the country.
With benefits, it's the people who prosper, without it's the wealthy.

Your country is for 70% dependent on internal consumption.
It's not the wealthy who create a healthy economy, it's the people.
If the people have money to spend, the economy prospers.
The only escape from that economic principle is trade, but Trump created tariffs.
You said you don't care about trade, but if you want your economy to do well,
you need Americans to buy your products. Lowering wages is a downward spiral.
Your billionaires cannot spend your economy healthy.

Maybe you should think about people not spending money on useless expenses
to directly pay the wealthy, without creating economic activity. For instance, high rent
for buildings that have existed for decades. That's just a clear handout to the owners
of the buildings, that creates almost no economic activity. Another is health insurance.
It only takes a lot of money from everyone, to transfer money to the wealthy, without creating health benefits for the people. It damages the economy, because it reduces people's spending power, without creating much economic activity. They are leaches.

What's the cause of the high number of mental illness cases in your country?
I think that it's the individualism, and the anti-rationality movement.

Sure, there is even a video of her blowing a boyfriend.
I would think her hotness would make the car more desirable.

Is there a difference between a country prospering and the people prospering?

Was the smell in that car worse than he expected?

New Study Reveals Brexit's True Price Tag Is Staggering
only registered users can see external links

It has been many years ago that I took cash from an ATM, but I can remember that I used an option sometimes to select the bills that it pays out. ChatGPT found some information about several major U.S. banks that have ATMs that let customers select the denomination of bills when withdrawing.

Chase Bank — Some “denomination-select” or “smart” Chase ATMs let you choose how your cash is split (e.g. $1, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100 bills).

PNC Bank — PNC has upgraded many of its ATMs to allow denomination choice, sometimes including smaller bills like $1 or $5.

Bank of America — Some of their ATMs (especially at larger/ metropolitan branches) reportedly support choosing between different bill denominations (e.g. $10, $20, $50, $100).

Wells Fargo — At certain upgraded or branch-location ATMs, mixed bill options (beyond just $20s) are sometimes available.

27 miles away is a bit far to get the desired bills from an ATM.
I would suggest finding a small store and exchanging the money there.
They are usually happy with smaller bills, because they can use them for change.

My girlfriend is on friendly basis with two shop owners. She sometimes exchanges
change for big bills with them, specifically to help them fill their cash register.
It depends on the business. Some get small bills all day from customers, overloading the cash register, requiring them to take trips to the bank to get rid of them. Those businesses wouldn't like you asking to exchange your small bills for their big bills. One of the shop owners my girlfriend knows has a souvenir shop. She often has pretty rich tourists paying with big bills for a small item, requiring lots of smaller bills in the cash register.

An analysis of a creationist movie, pretending that creationism is science.
only registered users can see external links

It starts with addressing how they all pretend to have scientific doctorates,
while those are all honorary titles from Christian colleges, that have no recognized accreditation to ensure it meets established standards of quality in education.
That means they have NO academic titles, and they are lying before the movie even starts.

Someone in the comments said: "Basically, they are just buying their own trophies
and claiming that they "won"."

✅ 2. How accurate have the old climate models been?

A 2019 study (Hausfather et al., Geophysical Research Letters) evaluated 17 climate models from 1970–2007.

Results:

Most models predicted today’s warming almost exactly once you account for real-world CO₂ emissions.
Their average accuracy was remarkably high.

Classic examples:

James Hansen’s 1988 model: Today’s temperatures fall between his middle (“Scenario B”) and high (“Scenario C”) projections — because emissions grew faster than expected in the 1990s–2000s.

IPCC 1990–2001 models predicted ~0.15°C warming per decade.
Actual warming since the 1990s is about 0.18–0.20°C per decade.

In short:
👉 The warming has tracked very closely to mainstream predictions.

✅ 3. Which scenario are we currently on (best case, worst case, or middle)?

Climate models use different emissions pathways (formerly “SRES,” now “RCPs” or “SSPs”). Here’s where humanity actually is:

🌍 We are not on the best-case trajectory

SSP1-1.9 (≈1.5°C world) → Humanity is not reducing emissions fast enough.

🌍 We are also not on the worst-case trajectory

The old “business-as-usual” high-end scenario

RCP8.5 / SSP5-8.5
is now considered unlikely because energy systems have shifted somewhat away from coal.

👉 We are currently closest to a middle-to-high emissions scenario

Most analyses put us near:

SSP2-4.5 (medium emissions)
or

SSP3-6.0 (high but not catastrophic emissions)

This corresponds to:

~2.4–3.0°C warming by 2100 if current policies continue.

If countries meet their long-term pledges, possibly ~2°C — but pledges are not policy.

So climate change today is playing out extremely close to what mid-range models from decades ago predicted.

Thunberg was banned from Venice after she participated in a protest that dyed the
Grand Canal green. But calling that “polluting historic waterways” is a loaded portrayal;
the demonstrators say they used non-toxic dye, and there is no proof of long-term pollution or damage. In other words: the “ban” and “dyeing” are real, but the “pollution of historic treasures” claim is more rhetorical spin than verified fact.

You are pushing a destructive right-wing agenda; Climate Change is real and destructive
and it's NOT left-wing to want to protect nature, and humanity that is dependent on it.

“None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true.”
That's an absolute lie, climate change is progressing as scientists predicted.
Many past “predictions” have already come true.

Climate scientists’ projections from the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s included:

✔ Continued global warming
Predicted since the 1970s.
Outcome: Correct. The planet has warmed about 1.2°C relative to pre-industrial levels — almost exactly what early models projected.

✔ More frequent and intense heatwaves
Predicted in the 1980s–1990s.
Outcome: Correct. Heatwaves are now more frequent, longer, and more intense on every continent except Antarctica.

✔ Rapid Arctic sea-ice decline
Predicted in the 1980s.
Outcome: Correct — the summer sea-ice minimum has declined by ~40% since satellite records began in 1979.

✔ Sea-level rise accelerating
Predicted since the First IPCC Report (1990).
Outcome: Correct — global sea level is rising faster today than in the late 20th century.

✔ Heavier rainfall & flooding
Predicted in the 1990s under a warming atmosphere with more water vapor.
Outcome: Correct — extreme rainfall events have increased globally.

✔ Increased wildfire risk
Predicted since the 1990s due to higher temperatures and drier vegetation.
Outcome: Correct, especially in western North America, Australia, Mediterranean, Siberia.

So the claim that “none of the predictions came true” is simply misinformation.

Mark Kelly - Trump has called for my execution because he didn’t like what I had to say
only registered users can see external links

No, it's not discrimination?
Yes, it is discrimination, because you accuse ALL OF THEM doing it,
and that's not true. And there is no link with BLM.

ChatGPT doesn't agree with your origin story:

The fashion trend of wearing pants low enough to show underwear—commonly called sagging—is generally traced to U.S. prisons in the 1970s–1980s, and later to hip-hop culture. Here are the main explanations:

1. U.S. Prison System (most commonly cited origin)
Prisons often forbade belts, because belts could be used as weapons or for self-harm.

As a result, pants frequently sagged, especially if they didn’t fit well.

Some versions of the story claim it signaled sexual availability, but historians and correctional officers largely dismiss this as a myth; the fit of clothing was simply poor.

2. Hip-Hop Culture (1990s onward)
Rappers and hip-hop artists adopted the look, partly reflecting prison culture and partly as a style of rebellion.

Artists like Tupac, Snoop Dogg, and groups like Onyx wore saggy pants in music videos, bringing it into mainstream youth fashion.

3. Skater and Street Cultures
In the 1990s and early 2000s, skateboarders also wore oversized, low-riding pants for comfort and style, which further spread the trend.

4. Symbol of Rebellion
For many young people, sagging became a deliberate anti-establishment statement,
a way to challenge dress norms and authority.

In short
Sagging emerged from prison clothing restrictions, became popularized by hip-hop, and evolved into a broad cultural fashion trend.

American Explains: The World Map
only registered users can see external links

Company owner thinks thought that tariffs wouldn't affect the price of his products (knives),
because they are American made. He found out he was wrong.
only registered users can see external links

This is a good example of discrimination. Because there is a fashion statement, predominantly by young black man, to walk around with their pants down and their
undies showing, you generalize that towards everyone who associates with BLM.
I know it's a joke, but it is a discriminatory joke.

They already have attention, lots of it, from your political side,
and it is very negative attention.

Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

There is a difference between acknowledging race and associating negative characteristics with that race, and assuming someone has certain negative characteristics, because they are a member of a certain race.

So, acknowledging that people are different isn't racism.
It depends very much on what differences you are talking about.
If you are associating certain differences with race, that have nothing to do with race, eg intelligence or ethics or human value, then that can be called out as racism.

James Chewbonic - I got Surgery to Smell for the First Time
only registered users can see external links

A guy made a fun video about his life.

Their lives were probably less complex, but that doesn't mean that they had less to worry about. They had fewer, but much serious worries, we have lots more, but less serious worries. You are worried about every fearmongering anecdote from your
right-wing news outlets, they were worried if they would survive the oncoming winter.

Coronaviruses have been around for millions of years, long before humans existed. Paleovirology has found some evidence that we inherited some resistance from the Neanderthals. Still, they died of so many diseases that we consider mild today.
And of course modern medicine has conquered several horrible diseases.
Unfortunately, modern anti-science is bringing some of them back.

The behavioral tendencies for racism are probably very old, but back then tribalism overruled it. People didn't just distrust other races, they distrust everyone outside of their tribe. It's behavior that is even observed in apes.

What I've read about it is that we have evolutionary tendencies to determine in-groups and out-groups, but racism emerged from cultural, political, and economic forces.
Racism as we understand it today—fixed, hierarchical, and global—emerged primarily in the last 500 years, driven by:
- colonial expansion
- the transatlantic slave trade
- European imperial ideologies
- scientific racism in the 18th–19th centuries

Slave trading has been going on for thousands of years, but it wasn't based on race. Read the bible and see how the Jews had different rules about owning slaves for Jews and everyone else. That was not based on race, because everyone in that area looked the same. It was based on in-groups and out-groups.

I don't think it's based on energy conservation, I think it's based on power preservation.
For a dominant group, defining another group as “inferior,” “different,” or “dangerous” creates:
- a boundary around the in-group
- a rationale for unequal treatment
- a story that justifies their power
This makes it easier to maintain control without relying solely on force.

Racism provides ideological cover for distributing benefits unequally: land, jobs, political rights, education, wealth and safety.

By claiming that some groups are “naturally suited” to labor, or “less civilized,” or “less intelligent,” the ruling group can preserve advantages and restrict competition.

A key principle of power is: It’s easier to rule a population that is divided than one that is united. Racism:
- creates divisions among the working class or subordinate groups
- prevents coalitions that might challenge the dominant group
- redirects frustration toward minority groups instead of toward the powerful

It legitimizes coercive institutions. Cultural beliefs about racial difference allow the in-group to build institutions that reinforce inequality, such as:
- segregated schools
- restricted voting rights
- discriminatory policing
- immigration controls
- unequal legal systems
These become seen as “necessary” instead of oppressive.

It stabilizes the dominant group’s identity. Power is not only material—it is also psychological. Racism gives the in-group:
- a sense of superiority
- a justification for their privileged position
- a shared identity built around dominance
This creates emotional cohesion within the ruling group.

It masks the real mechanisms of power. Racism can make inequality appear:
- natural
- inevitable
- rooted in biology
- the “fault” of the oppressed group
This hides the structural causes, allowing the powerful to avoid accountability.

Thus, racism is not an evolutionary adaptation, it is a cultural strategy that societies can (and often do) use to maintain power structures.

You cannot achieve 'true equality' by ignoring differences between people.
Race still plays a part, because of systemic discrimination.
Ignoring the existence of that is the opposite of having the goal of ANY equality.

You think that Trump has any principles, that's where you go wrong.
It's all political theater, to distract you. It's just a grift.
He only says the things he says, because he wants you to believe them.
He turns on a dime, on everything he ever said, if he thinks he can score with it.
He does it all the time, but because you are in a cult, you don't even realize.

Trump only cares about himself and popularity (the 'ratings').
He envies Mamdani for his overwhelming popularity.

No dumb-ass, they are corporatists; wealthy people who like the capitalist system, because it favors wealthy people.

Capitalism works for THEM, because they are the WEALTHY who exploit everyone else.
And if they are still only rich yet, they get paid by the wealthy.

How many times did I tell you that it is shear stupidity to call the Democrats "Socialists!", "Communists!", "Radical left!", "Far left!" and "Marxists!"?

Now you see it for yourself, and then you make some stupid comment about it.

HIDDEN CAMERA – Trump’s DOJ on plans to redact Republicans from Epstein Files
only registered users can see external links

Like no one thought of them doing that.

In any case, that's a clear admission that he knows that there's lots of Republicans in it.
The first released version will likely be painted black for 80%.

Do you think that camping for 17 years is a worthwhile way to spend your life?

No problems? One tiny infection can kill you.
What do you think his teeth are like? Would he still have some?

Maybe you would have more rational political insights, if you wouldn't romanticize
living like a wild animal or some caveman. You are probably still recovering somewhat from a medical intervention that saved your life, but instead of absorbing that into your worldview, you think people are better off living like we did 10,000 years ago.
Understand that even the poorest person in the modern world has a much better
quality of life than the people back then. About half the children died before the age of 5, from some disease, accident or being eaten by a predator.

Every Day Began With Uncertainty. A person woke up not knowing if they would eat that day. Seasons mattered brutally: winter or drought could mean days with almost nothing—maybe a handful of nuts, bitter roots, or dried meat if they had been lucky enough to store some.

Cold, heat, wind, and rain all mattered more than any predator.

Clothing was animal hide, often stiff, smelly, and poorly insulating. Shelters were drafty huts or temporary camps. A single storm could wipe out a group’s food stores, trap them indoors, or kill the very young and the very old.

Aches, injuries, and infections were simply part of existence.
- No painkillers beyond plants that dulled the senses
- No medical treatment for sprains, fractures, or infected wounds
- Teeth worn down from grit in stone-ground food
- Parasites, fleas, lice
Most adults lived with chronic pain that would send a modern person to the ER.

Large predators still roamed in many regions—lions, wolves, cave bears, saber-toothed cats (in earlier periods), hyenas.
Even more dangerous were simply:
Falls, Cuts that got infected, Snakebites, Fires and Conflict with other groups. Any of these could be fatal.

Parents expected to lose children; grief was constant, quiet, and communal.

Whether hunter-gatherer or early farmer, work was exhausting.
For hunters:
- Track animals for hours or days
- Carry heavy meat back to camp
- Face dangerous prey
For gatherers:
- Bend and kneel for hours collecting roots, seeds, nuts
- Process plants by scraping, pounding, grinding

For early farmers:
- Dig, plant, weed, haul water
- Defend fields from animals
- Store grain or risk starvation

While some individuals lived into their 50s or even 60s, the average life expectancy was dramatically pulled down by:
- infant deaths
- infections
- accidents
- childbirth risks
- malnutrition
Living to 30 was already an accomplishment.

Anxiety was a permanent companion:
- Will we eat tomorrow?
- Will the weather turn?
- Is that sound a predator?
- Are other tribes approaching?
There was wonder, community, and meaning—but also relentless uncertainty.

The only upside I see from that time is that the tribe helped each other to stay alive. Nowadays, people are completely isolated from each other. People are selfish, because that is idolized as the goal for self improvement. The sad thing is that people who support that selfish system often point to 10,000 years back, calling it "survival of the fittest".
That is very dishonest propaganda to justify inequality, because it is the opposite of what evolution teaches. Humans survived because of cooperation, resource sharing, division of labor, caring for the vulnerable and group solidarity.

Nonsense, the average government debt-to-GDP ratio for the European Union (EU)
was 81.9% at the end of the second quarter of 2025.
In the second quarter of 2025, the U.S. government's debt-to-GDP ratio was 119.4%.
If the EU is broke, the US is much more broke.

The EU is asking the UK for “billions”, but these are not arbitrary demands; they are part of a legally binding Brexit financial settlement. It’s the UK repaying agreed obligations as part of the Brexit exit deal.

So, you're just parroting filthy lies for a political reason.

Trump is ILLEGALLY withholding hundreds of billions of dollars in funding from California,
while Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta are successfully fighting Trump
in court and taking back $168 billion of the money that they are owed, and now you are blaming California for their deficit? Wow, that's dishonest!

only registered users can see external links

Californians already paid about $275.6 billion more in federal taxes than they received
in federal spending, keeping afloat all those poverty stricken red states, and you have
the nerve to blame them for their Trump induced deficit? Damn!

Brooke Rollins (U.S. Secretary of Agriculture) claimed that, but provided NO underlying data publicly, in a way that independent fact-checkers could fully verify the 186,000 deceased number.

Brooke Rollins is a political figure with close ties to Trump. There are plausible motivations for her to frame SNAP-fraud data in a way that aligns with Trump-era policy goals.

You're cherry picking the most positive poll in existence,
and he is still below 50%, in your most positive poll.

The polling aggregator Silver Bulletin (built on the work of Nate Silver) reports his approval at about 41.2 % as of Nov 22, 2025.
only registered users can see external links

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found his approval at only 38 %
only registered users can see external links

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Barack Obama's popularity, as measured by various job approval polls, was frequently less than 50% during his time in office.
While he won the national popular vote in both his presidential elections with over 50% (52.9% in 2008 and 51.1% in 2012), his day-to-day or weekly job approval ratings fluctuated considerably.

Key points regarding his approval ratings:

Early Presidency: He started with a high approval rating of 67% in January 2009.

Declines: His rating gradually dropped over the next two years, hitting a low of 40%
in September and October 2011.

Mid-Presidency: For a period of about three years, from March 2013 to March 2016, his approval rating consistently stayed below 50%, never dipping below 40% but also never rising above 49% during that time.

End of Term: His popularity rose again toward the end of his second term, finishing his presidency with a final weekly rating of 59% in mid-January 2017.

It is important to say that Obama didn't have majorities in congress, so he couldn't do anything he wanted to do. Trump has a majority in congress. That doesn't really matter, because Trump is the king of national emergencies and executive orders, bypassing congress. He also has a supreme court that mostly lets him do whatever he wants.

That is significant, because it means that Obama was not very popular for not being able to do the things that he promised, while Trump is unpopular for doing the things that he's doing. Trump can do what he wants, but is still ignoring lots of promises that he made.

It saddens me to see that the American public doesn't understand this,
and values one of the best presidents that the US ever had only a bit higher
than the worst one.

That's called "cherry picking": picking ONE outlier that confirms what you want to believe.
And then you act happy about a positive outlier putting him below 50%. That's funny to me.

Rasmussen’s methodology: They focus on likely voters, and their daily tracking poll is a specific type of sample. Other polls use all adults or registered voters, which can yield different results.

Polling averages show his approval is lower than 47 %. For example:

The polling aggregator Silver Bulletin (built on the work of Nate Silver) reports his approval at about 41.2 % as of Nov 22, 2025.
only registered users can see external links

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found his approval at only 38 %
only registered users can see external links

She isn't really that dumb, she is just playing it. She is absolutely useless though.
Never did anything positive for the people she represents. But, that's the type of people your side is voting for. You like the dumb, hateful rhetoric, and you have no idea
what they are actually doing.

Of course you hate Rachel Maddow. She represents everything you hate.
And she makes your president look stupid and evil every day.
And of course you need to use a slur for her being lesbian,
because you're a bigot.

No, MTG is NOT unpredictable. She is doing exactly what is best for her,
long term. She hitched her wagon to Trump when he was hot, and she is now unhooking it, before he drags her into the ravine. She is stupid, but she is not as stupid to believe all the things she is saying. She just panders to stupid people. She is the alt-right candidate, a Neo-Nazi, like Nick Fuentes. Horrible people, who also hitched their wagon to Trump, but who are not in the Trump cult,
like you. They have their own cult, and they want to take over, when your cult crumbles. That's what MTG is preparing for.

Almost all Republican politicians voted to release the Epstein files.
That's them doing the same as MTG; unhooking their wagon from Trump.
Trump showed no loyalty towards ANY of them EVER, so they will kick him down when the time comes. If that happens, and MTG takes over, you will be licking
her feet in no time.

Why the Stock Market Hasn’t Crashed Yet? What They Don’t Want You to Know.
only registered users can see external links

"Markets don't crash when things look bad, they crash when the forces
holding everything together finally break"

The McLaren SLR is hypercar royalty. Maybe Paris Hilton ruined it.
Or the guy doesn't know what he's talking about.
Or the guy has expectations for cars that doesn't match.
If you want to take your wife and four kids shopping, the McLaren SLR sucks.

The topic was "What happened to Marjorie Taylor Greene? Did she get bitten by Rachel Maddow?" -The Daily Show

Iran's ayatollah is a Far-right, ultraconservative, dumb-ass.

You're also a dumb-ass for calling the Democrats "far left".

Damn, you don't know, nor understand, anything!

Nothing of what you said is applicable to Marjorie Taylor Greene or Rachel Maddow.

Yes, I'm a socialist! No, I do not hate Israel. No, I do not hate Jewish people.
I hate the Netanyahu regime, that has committed a genocide, which has not stopped.
Many Jews, in Israel and all over the world, hate Netanyahu too.

I don't hate the USA, I hate your ideology. Your ideology is anti-American.
You are committing treason towards American values.

When our country is attacked, according to our NATO alliance, that is an attack
on all other NATO allies, including your country. You would be obligated to help.

By the way, your country is doing war posturing right in front of our borders,
because Venezuela is a neighboring country. We don't like it.

Aruba lies less than 15 miles (24 km) from Venezuela's shores.
Curaзao is about 40 miles (65 km) north of Venezuela.
Bonaire is approximately 50 miles (80 km) off the coast.

If We Tax Rich People... They Will Just Leave!
only registered users can see external links

Real economics destroying the wealthy's favorite lie.

Yeah, it's the Jewish space laser broad, of course.
You didn't think she was crazy then, just now she opposes the sex offender.

Maybe learn to not pull QAnon lunatics into your ranks.
It's all fun to accuse Democrats of having a pdf file ring,
until you vote for a president who was very much part of it.
Then the people you turned crazy, might turn against you.

Of all the reasons to abandon a politician you once supported, that is a good one.
Don't you think?

How many Trump supporters does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
None.... Trump says it's fixed, so they sit in the dark and cheer.

He is giving orders to have people murdered by the military.
He doesn't have to face anyone personally. He doesn't even see the death bodies.
The most cowardly person in the world can do that. (and is)

No, dumb-ass, it's the corruption that makes some Democrats switch party.

Also, being a Republican politician is SOOOO EASY.
You lot don't want anything and believe such childish lies.
Hurting people is your ONLY demand, and that's EASY.

Marjorie Taylor Greene or Rachel Maddow?

Thanks, but it's just sad that some foreigners have to tell Americans how they are screwed.

We just had an election in the Netherlands. Healthcare was a very important topic. We had at least 6 parties debate their healthcare plans clearly. All parties had their programs analyzed, so the Dutch people can clearly understand the impact of their vote on healthcare. Some parties invest in lower costs for the people, other parties cut expenses and reduce what the basic insurance will cover.

MAGA Americans don't know shit. They refuse to understand that cutting billions
from taxes funding healthcare will make their insurance premiums higher and their coverage lower. Either they believe in fairy-tales or they just like to be lied to.

They voted for a president who clearly does the opposite of what he promised,
and they like it. I come from a country where promises matter.

They are talking about the Milankovitch cycles, which I explained about in the
'YouTube can be educational too (let's share videos)' topic.

There are three main cycles:
1) ~100,000 years for changes in orbital eccentricity (shape of Earth's orbit)
2) ~41,000 years for changes in axial tilt (obliquity)
3) ~23,000 to 26,000 years for the wobble of the Earth's axis (precession)

They are completely irrelevant for human made climate change, that has the potential
to decimate humanity in a few HUNDRED years, from increasing the temperature,
many thousands of years before the next ice age is due, if humanity DOESN'T ACT.

The reassuring article from Bill Gates, that you posted a while back, takes into account
that humanity DOES ACT, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN WE ARE ACTING NOW.

September 2015 – “60 Minutes” interview with Scott Pelley on CBS 60 Minutes,
Trump said: “Everybody’s got to be covered … I am going to take care of everybody.
I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.”

When asked who would pay, he responded: “The government’s gonna pay for it.”

He added that his plan would still involve private plans, with competition:
“It’s going to be a private plan … people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans … they can have their doctors … they can have plans … everything.”

As president-elect, Trump told the Washington Post:
“We’re going to have insurance for everybody. … There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.”

Feb 13, 2025 – Trump signed an Executive Order to establish the “Make America Healthy Again Commission.”. According to the White House fact sheet, the commission will investigate major causes of chronic disease in America, “prioritize gold-standard research,” and develop strategies to improve health coverage flexibility.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” includes about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.
According to ITEP, more than 70% of the net tax cuts go to the richest 20% of Americans.
ITEP also says the richest 5% alone will get 45% of the new tax cuts.
For the top 1%, ITEP estimates they’ll receive total tax cuts of $1.02 trillion over 10 years.

The Americans for Tax Fairness group claims Trump’s plan would cut “nearly $2 trillion from health care, mostly Medicaid.”
The CBO estimates those changes could leave 10+ million people uninsured.

Conclusion: Trump is taking away healthcare for 10+ million Americans,
to give the richest people in the US some more money.
Is that what he promised the American people?

I know you don't care about anything bad happening under a Republican
and you don't care about anything good happening under a Democrat.
I just don't understand what you are voting for then.
Do you understand that politicians should represent you, not the other way around?

Trump did achieve something; he angered all the other countries, who have now found other trading partners than the US, and made them consider to abandon the dollar
as the world's principal reserve currency.

By the way, do you want to sell me some fine Canadian products?
You can also come to Europe for your winter vacation.

China makes everything from ridiculous scams to complete competition busters.
Some of their good products are kept from you, by your government.
There are often good reasons for it, like China using forced labor.
But, some of it is just protectionism. That might not even be a bad strategy.
However, if they have access to the cheapest electricity in the world, because
they make the best solar panels at the best price, it is not smart to keep them away
from our manufacturing, because then they pay more for electricity. That's a setback
that puts us further behind.

There is no dignity to the people who work in motels, it's exploitation. No American can life of that wage, but immigrants are forced to, out of desperation.

If you want Americans to do those jobs, you need to exploit them less, because that is bad for the economy. Those people cannot spend anything, can only live in slums, cannot afford children or if they have them accidentally, they cannot afford a decent education. Then you are losing against China even more, because they have armies of well educated, highly motivated, young people, to fill any technical position.

I'm saying this about the US, but it's getting more applicable to my country fast.
We are not educating our young people enough for the highly technical jobs.
Young people more often choose Business Administration, Commercial Economics, Finance, Medicine, Nursing, Psychology, Communication, Marketing, HR, Social Studies, Design, Media, Music, Gaming, Tourism, Pedagogy, Cybersecurity, Embedded Systems, AI Engineering, etc.
They keep pulling away to those educations, while the demand for technically educated people is skyrocketing, because we want to be less dependent on China.

I see it in my own work environment. Many of my new colleagues are from another country. I'm surprised if one gets introduced in Dutch to me. I speak more English
than Dutch at work. If the right-wingers in my country win big, and actually stop immigration and sends these people back, my employer can close up shop.

Meanwhile, the right-wing has NO strategy to invest in automation for when they stop the refugees from the horrible countries, who do the lower skilled work now, nor do they have a strategy to invest in technical education, to replace the expats who are filling
the technical jobs now. It's just blind short-term thinking: "We don't like immigrants!".