MountingSuspicion

joined 2 years ago
[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 3 points 2 months ago

OP is a bot or basically exclusively using ChatGPT for posts/comments. I would suggest not engaging with them. They are not here in good faith.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 4 points 2 months ago

This is a bot or someone using ChatGPT for all their comments. Do not engage with them. They are not here in good faith.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago

Very possible, but also they are trying to be a "facts" based site so allegations are not really a thing they can adjudicate without compromising that. Like in this scenario there's no exact evidence to point to other than circumstantial so they have to say that it has not been proven to be true. I appreciate that in news sources. Obviously I can read into things and draw my own conclusions but I need to be able to go to a place that lays out the "facts" as clearly as possible without editorializing. Media used to do that more when they had to appeal to more people because there were less sources. Now the media landscape is fragmented and you can find "news" sources saying just anything so they're less incentivized to even appear unbiased.

Trump is obviously a terrible person and just having the facts themselves laid out should sway any normal person. Unfortunately that's not what we have.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It is pretty clear to most people that they are not saying someone posed as a McDonalds employee. I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse, but in case you or anyone else is misunderstanding, they are suggesting the following: A cop/fed illegally obtained his whereabouts. They follow him into a McD. The cop/fed goes up to McD employee and says "you should call in a tip there's a big reward". They don't mention they are a cop/fed to the McD employee. Now that there is a record of "an anonymous tip" they have an on the books explanation of how they located him without having to disclose how they actually were able to track him.

I'm not saying that's what happened, but you seem to have repeatedly misunderstood so I'm just making it clear.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A YouTuber or mechanic can have all of those, but you said you wouldn't count them. At this point I'm not even sure what you're getting at. My original point is that not all businesses can be sold for tens of thousands. You can disagree or redefine the word business if you want but I know the reality of it. Neither of us are getting anywhere at this point so I'm happy to just end this here.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 7 points 2 months ago

Yea. I totally understand that. And like I said I understand and appreciate that it at least has eugenics in the term, but it's very much still eugenics and the fact we have to delineate between hard and soft is just silly in my opinion. Eugenics is still eugenics regardless of if executed on site or just left to starve or die. It is technically not as "direct" I guess but it is still 100% eugenics. I wasn't explicitly criticizing the use of the term just that we live in a society where we now have that distinction and have to make it clear so a bunch of bad faith actors don't point to the fact there's no gun to peoples head and say therefore no eugenics.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I hadn't heard of this but it looks like snopes has an acceptable write up. They do state that no one has come out and said it was a quid pro quo, but no other reason was given. Just leaving the link here in case other people are interested.

ETA: to be clear Trump and his admin are obviously corrupt. I just wasn't aware of the particulars of this situation.

https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/05/02/trump-wells-fargo-inauguration-donation/

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 52 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I get why that term is used, but eugenics is eugenics. At least soft eugenics has the word in it, but it really isn't soft it's just normal eugenics. I can't wait for them to rebrand labor camps as soft prisons or whatever because technically the people there aren't prisoners so they can call it something else.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago

Thanks for the reassurance.

We're generally pretty good and I think that's the issue. It feels so weird to have a normal loving relationship it feels like that itself is cause for concern lol. Will definitely find some extra time today to tell them how special they are though.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'm not sure why you think having multiple employees is necessary for a business. You need to register a business regardless of how many employees it has and need to pay taxes and carry applicable licenses and insurance regardless. Does a married couple working together count because it's technically two people? Does someone who pays a contract company or temp agency to cover business tasks count? If I run a remodeling business but I just do the plans and subcontract entire construction teams to do the actual remodel that wouldn't count by your metric. It seems like it falls into the kind of thinking OOP is suggesting against. You seem to have just decided that a business needs to meet some random requirement in order to be valid. What exactly is a single mechanic who works for themselves supposed to say? Do they not own a business?

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago (5 children)
  1. Freelancing is a valid business. I don't know why there'd be a distinction in this case.
  2. I don't think people would be considered freelancers just because they have personal relationships with other small businesses.

There was a dessert business I used to do work for that catered a lot of local businesses events. She got plenty of work there and then had a loyal customer base because of the introduction to her desserts at these events. That seems like a valid business to me. She retired and moved to be closer to her kids and that was it. No one to take her place. I don't know what you consider freelancing but she put her kids through school off of it so I don't know why it wouldn't count as business even if she technically never had long term contracts. She had her stuff in stores in the area because she made a name for herself and her products. People liked her and her story as much as the food so I don't think people would've kept buying it if they found out she didn't own it anymore.

I think you might not be aware of how many people have small businesses. 10% of American workers are self employed. I have done a lot of work for small businesses and it's very different than what a lot of people who had a teacher and a factory worker as parents think.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Plenty of otherwise successful businesses could not be sold for tens of thousands of dollars just for the name. Several are in business solely because of personal connections with other small businesses. Once that element is gone people go elsewhere. At least in my community/experience.

view more: ‹ prev next ›