Infidel Dog
-
Posts
5,858 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
28
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Infidel Dog
-
-
10 hours ago, robosmith said:
Certain Capitol Police officers being members of the Trump cult does not make ANYTHING "horse shit" except YOUR INTERPRETATION of what happened.
Sorry, denier. Your only excuse for not recognizing the Horseshit that should be burning in your nostrils now is refusing to recognize the evidence.
-
3
-
-
Like I said, I'm not even saying affirmative action hiring is a big problem. I'm saying there's a good possibility of varied problems and not just in America. Pretty sure our cops have unions here too, if that's what you're worried about.
-
56 minutes ago, Contrarian said:
Let us look at Derek Chauvin's thugery:
Complaints of misconduct: Chauvin had received at least 18 complaints filed with the Minneapolis Police Department's Internal Affairs division throughout his career, though he was only disciplined for two of them.
so what if the other cop was black? Union politics is not about race, that is political. Union is protecting their own, regardless.
Maybe an AI police will do. Better than emotional cops.
Separate incident. Proves nor disproves nothing.
That guy who shot Ashli Babbit had a record of carelessness. I wonder if he was a diversity hire. He didn't appear to be a very good cop. Again, proves nor disproves nothing. Just another thing to think about.
The cops with Chauvin were black, oriental and 2 whites. Chauvin was hired pre-affirmative action push in 2001.
These were the guys that beat Tyre Nichols to death:
I don't want to harp on the affirmative action thing. I'm just saying a lot of things can go wrong in the cop business. If you want to focus on one and make it look like the only one you can do that. You shouldn't, but you can.
BTW, Cops aren't all saints here in Canada either. I'm pretty sure police unions aren't just a problem in America.
-
Fair enough. In fact, it almost sounds like you're agreeing with me.
I can think of another one. Speaking of specific ones do you remember the one where the Somalian cop shot that Australian woman in her pajamas? Apparently he'd done stupid things before.
On my side of the aisle they were pointing at affirmative action hires.
I'm not saying that's the only problem with policing in America. I'm saying in Minneapolis that may have been one problem at one time.
But yeah, the union did it's best to protect the guy in that case, as I recall.
-
I see. So it's no longer a general issue with policing in America then.
You've seen incidents in America where you see America specific problems with some policing and you would like "politicians and activists" to fix those.
You're just talking about what you call "flaws." Specifically then, what flaws?
-
42 minutes ago, robosmith said:
NO ONE said "all cops are bad." That is YOUR STRAWMAN.
Well, actually that would be a misunderstanding not a strawman.
So you're not saying "all cops are bad then?"
Very well, answer the poll question again then, "What is the issue with policing in America?"
The premise there appears to be there is a general issue specifically with policing in America. In America as opposed to any place else.
It also appeared to me that you were falling in line with that premise and telling me that the fact you could find videos online of bad policing proved it.
But now you say, 'no, that wasn't what you meant." I assume you're saying now you were only talking about the incidents of bad policing caught on video and those are the specific ones you want to fix.
That's good. Because I've also seen many examples of good policing on video. Also police who were accused of bad policing but the police cam disproved any malfeasance.
I'm hopeful you and the OP aren't wanting to fix those as well.
There is an option in the poll for "There is no issue" But that would be disingenuous from your perspective because according to you now, you're just talking about the incidents of bad policing you saw on YouTube.
-
1 hour ago, Contrarian said:
Why are you compromising your higher intellect with neo nazi and disgruntled men that activate this forum, from the right?
Listen, I might have personal issues but went to school to read people, I know someone that can think for himself when I read one.
You are better than this, young man, time to give everyone the middle finger and achieve.
https://ca.coursera.org/specializations/intro-cyber-security
It starts March 6th.
Lose the patronizing tone, Bud. You're better than nobody.
If you have a better argument than mine, produce it. Justify it. Otherwise don't waste my time.
-
2 hours ago, robosmith said:
A LOT of cops' misconduct is ON VIDEO these days, so "MSM BS" is NOT a FACTOR in those cases.
There are some videos of bad cops so all cops are bad. Is that your prog logic, hasty generalization of the day?
But hey, off topic for a bit. I've been sick lately, getting up at strange hours. I notice that seems to be your MO. Prowling around late at night, early into the morning. How do you deal with it? Get back to sleep, I mean. Warm milk?
-
6. Candy-assed Progs and the dim-witted who fall for MSM BS won't let the police do their jobs.
-
One can almost see it as a Pyramid scheme.
-
The thing about ESG is it's not a money making enterprise.
Don't misunderstand me. There are companies on the ESG checklist that are making out like bandits. (Mostly because that's what they are - bandits) But ultimately that's government and union money. Sooner or later the bubble has to burst.
-
1 hour ago, Hodad said:
So, again, per your cite. "noted that the Labor Department rule was voluntary, so it didn’t require fund managers to actually do anything."
So it's 100% disingenuous to say that Biden is forcing anyone to invest in ESG. Individual investors have NEVER had a voice in how fund managers assess value.
Drop the lies and get real.
OK, I'll just keep saying it until you hear me then. The trump rule disallowed ideological based investments over profit.
Then the Biden regime came in with what you're calling the labor department rule. It allowed ideology based investments over profit prioritized ones.
But, and I've said this at least 3 times now there are ways to either drip, drip, drip new government restrictions in or to allow an inevitable ESG monopoly to take over so there is no other place to go.
And on the way there the working guys whose pension managers are on board with the globalist ideology over profit approach are screwed. Their only choice is to wait and see what's going to happen with their money.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, August1991 said:
Johnson can collect the ballots.
In the past, Dems worried about voter registering and getting them to vote on a single day.
With Covid, Dems discovered Krytonite. Now: Voters don't have to vote on a single day.
You do know Vallas is also a Democrat, right?
-
58 minutes ago, August1991 said:
Disagree.
Do the math.
Which Math?
You mean this math?
Mayor lightfoot finished third, behind:
"
former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas, who won 33.95 % and Cook County Commissioner and Chicago Teachers Union organizer Brandon Johnson, who wound up with 20.32%."
https://www.chicago.suntimes.com/live/chicago-election-day-2023-results-live-updates
But then you have to add the far left and black vote Johnson should inherit from Lightfoot. But then add the law and order vote even leftists are swinging to after Chicago has become such a crime ridden cesspool.
Sounds like the runoff might be pretty tight to me.
-
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:
Sorry, I didn't see it up there. That link talks of the fund that provides the Canada Pension Plan, which I did not know was taking that stance. That said, are other pension funds in the country being forced to take the same stance? The government will underwrite that pension if something goes wrong. Other funds don't have that luxury.
Right. If you pay into the Canada Pension Plan, you don't get a choice. You're building windmills, funding gender affirmation surgery or whatever other of Justin's little pet projects might appease the globalists this week.
As far as private pensions go, feel free to jump in the tepid water with the soon to be boiling frogs finding out all to soon that ESG has become a monopoly and you've lost any choice you might have had at one time.
-
11 hours ago, Hodad said:
This is starting to feel like a VERY remedial vocabulary lesson.
From your quote: "permits fiduciary retirement fund managers to consider"
Are you using some kind of special conservative dictionary in which "permit" means "force"?
I believe I was pretty clear. Once you permit ESG and fund managers have accepted it for whatever ideological reasons the worker paying into the pension fund begins to lose his choice. And before he realizes what's happening ESG becomes a monopoly or under government control and he has no choice.
BTW did you read the part in the link where it told us this is actually the third rendition of this law. It started with a Trump law or rule to protect the worker with a profit over ideology restriction. He didn't want the worker getting Madoffed.
OK, I see it different than CNBC does but we're both talking about the same thing.
QuoteDemocrats also noted that the Labor Department rule was voluntary, so it didn’t require fund managers to actually do anything.
Instead, it released them from the previous rules, enacted during the Trump administration, which required that managers of federally governed pension funds limit their investment decisions only to what would generate the highest returns, effectively prohibiting them from considering other factors.
Republican critics of the Labor Department’s new rule say it undermines 401(k) retirement funds by allowing investment managers to put ideological issues such as climate change ahead of investment returns.
-
11 hours ago, bcsapper said:
But it is optional. I haven't heard about a Trudeau decision (cite?) but the thread was about a US Congress decision and Joe Biden's potential veto, and its effects on the decisions of pension fund managers. Those decisions are still made by the fund managers, based on whatever they see fit.
Worldwide, I'm sure other jurisdictions are different. I'm pretty sure the UK is.
Again, the cite is already posted above ^^^. Right after:
"
Today it all depends on where you live - Canada or America.
Canada's globalists and wannabe Socialists in charge have jumped on ESG with both feet and there aren't a lot of options:."
I wrote that in reply to a comment from Hodad and then I continued talking about America.
But yeah if you're talking about what's optional even in America you should be aware of which way the momentum is swinging globally. I believe they've also withdrawn choice on ESG in parts of Europe.
And I believe that's the direction Biden would like to take it given the opportunity.
-
18 hours ago, bcsapper said:
I could be wrong about this, so I'm happy to be corrected, but hasn't that always been the case? Haven't all pension funds, (teachers, unions, government employees, etc) always been run by fund managers with no input at all from those paying into and expecting a pension? At best they get an annual statement, after the fact.
Nothing has changed except there are more options. It still behooves a pension fund manager to act in the best interests of the members.
In Canada Trudeau has removed the option of refusing ESG so that appears to be new. In America, depending on who's in power, the membership might still have the option of pressuring the leadership not to go ideology over profit.
But even if the Biden regime does offer an option to their friends in union leadership of refusing ESG there is still the possibility of drip, dripping towards a monopoly of ESG the way they did with social media. At this point leadership can simply throw up their hands with a smile on their face and say 'sorry guys, you're building windmills. Oh...and your pensions will be a little less. Sorry about that."
-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, Hodad said:
So are you conceding that you misunderstood the topic? That, indeed, Biden is not forcing retirement funds to do anything related to ESG? Because you definitely didn't provide a link or address that issue.
The link is 5 posts up from this one and just above the post where you started whinging.
"
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Wednesday voted to overturn a Labor Department rule that permits fiduciary retirement fund managers to consider climate change, good corporate governance and other factors when making investments on behalf of pension plan participants.
President Joe Biden said Monday that he will veto the Senate bill if it comes to his desk — the first veto of his presidency."
Nationalist is correct. If a union member's union invests in a pension fund he donates to throughout his working life and the funds go to an ESG compliant company like say Black Rock or Vanguard he has no option but to accept it. There is no choice for that guy. Biden passed a law allowing his choice to be taken away from him.
Not that you asked but Trudeau applied the force of law demanding acceptance of ESG even harder.
I repeated that last bit of information on choice so Sapper could hopefully hear it this time. I think he might be going for the record of not reading what's in front of his face though.
I'll just copy and paste next time, Sappy and we'll run a counter for you.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Hodad said:
Can I ask how this is an example of the government meddling? ESG-focused funds aren't a government creation or product. It's just an option in the marketplace.
About half of consumers are willing to pay a premium to do business with companies that have positive ESG programs and that number is going to continue to go up. Employees--top talent--increasingly factor ESG into their career decisions. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that there is a market for investing that takes ESG into account. And it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to allow fund managers to factor in that value and future market value.
Now I realize that it gets less clear cut when fund managers are working with other people's money, but It's also true that fund management styles and approaches have always been differentiators between funds. Organizations that don't want to be involved with these funds can make the market decision to choose others. It seems to me that legally prohibiting fund managers from considering ESG (rather than letting the market do the work) would actually the government interference.
Today it all depends on where you live - Canada or America.
Canada's globalists and wannabe Socialist in charge have jumped on ESG with both feet and there aren't a lot of options:
Canada’s pension fund will punish ESG failings
In America the fight goes into another gear with Republicans winning the house. ESG is referred to as woke capitalism and the opposition describes it like this:
QuoteRepublican critics of the Labor Department’s new rule say it undermines 401(k) retirement funds by allowing investment managers to put ideological issues such as climate change ahead of investment returns.
“The last thing we should do is encourage fiduciaries to make decisions with a lower rate of return for purely ideological reasons,” Sen. Mike Braun of Indiana, the Senate’s lead sponsor of the bill, said earlier this month.
But yeah, for and against in America by those that matter seems to be a left or right, 50/50 split.
QuoteThe final vote in the Senate was 50-46, with two Democratic senators crossing party lines to support the repeal bill: Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Sen. Jon Tester of Montana. Both are up for reelection next year in conservative-leaning states.
Senate overturns federal rule on ESG investments, Biden vows to veto
-
Also, ESG isn't necessarily optional.
Consider if you belong to a union in America for instance and that union puts its pension fund in the hands of some big money management company, like say Black Rock or Vanguard. And suppose they like the idea of the ESG racket for their own devious, globalist friendly purposes.
So your pension fund is what's at play and you personally have very little choice.
-
1
-
-
I assume you're talking about the Democrat, April Runoff, Primary.
In the first election Vallas finished on top.
Johnson was second and current mayor Lori Lightfoot was knocked out.
What's suspected is that Brandon Johnson, being not just far left but black will inherit the Lori Lightfoot vote surging him to the front.
However...Vallas is the law and order guy. Johnson is pretty much defund the police. That's becoming a big issue in Chicago. I wouldn't make any bets on this one just yet.
-
3 hours ago, robosmith said:
IF that were true, you HAVE the CHOICE to invest elsewhere,
Why? Did somebody say you didn't?
As I understand it that's one of the problems with ESG. People and organizations can pull their investments. I think money managers and others in on ESG want a monopoly so that you have no place to go but them.
-
Absolutely. Choose to be as silly as you want. Mortgage your home if you like. But when the money's all gone and you don't actually have any of this equity you were promised or for that matter even a pension maybe you'll agree that the crooks that put you in that position didn't deserve so much choice.
Like I said I'm not for Bernie Madoff style choice.
TUCKER CARLSON AND THE JAN. 6 VIDEO
in US Federal Politics
Posted · Edited by Infidel Dog
Brian Sicknick was. He was also frisky and in perfect health, filmed in the building after he was supposed to be getting murdered outside in the riot. The "deadly insurrection" label was a lie and the subcommittee knew about it.
He was giving tours, but to his constituents. The tours weren't in the building and you can see families milling around holding the hands of their children.
"Tours to invaders" was another lie the subcommittee knew about.
Watch the video, Dummy. Stop embarrassing yourself.