Almost like Clinton should have run a real campaign in MI😃. Stop running unpopular candidates and blaming it on greens. How embarassing lol.

Isn't low unemployment a "despite the Biden administration" thing? Wasn't that the whole point of the interest rate hikes to "cool off" the economy (I.E. increase unemployment). Am I missing something?

Yes lol. If you can't run a candidate that isn't whole heartedly in on genocide, then you shouldn't expect votes from people who don't like said genocide. The dems clearly don't actually give a fuck about democracy, why not actually throw that antipopulism behind a candidate who actually appeals to people. "Still uncommited" haha GTFO. Yell at the people actually choosing the candidate, not the people who don't want to vote for the meat puppet. I mean...Jesus fucking Christ.

Right! I asked a hypothetical question, so you're really hitting the nail squarely on the head.

This whole twitter thing is like some lib version of a moral panic. Who cares, just get off it if you don't like the experience. But no, they all need to tell everyone how this makes them so morally pure.

All ideas deserve to be refuted, which is why suppression isn't the answer.

As far as the specifics of your claims, I don't think anything has been definitively show to be true regarding the origin of COVID. The paper you linked said that the first hotspot they found were in the wet markets, assuming that's the case, it still doesn't say if it was naturally produced or as part of a "gain of function" research program that was in place at the time.

https://theintercept.com/collections/origins-of-covid/

Check this out for a deeper dive into the intercepts work on corona virus origins. There is no smoking gun, no gotcha moment, in fact it may be a natural origin. My point wasn't that it did happen in a lab leak, but that lab leak turned out to be a viable theory of origin, in spite of how it was portrayed by officials, the media and social media.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/16/politics/biden-intel-review-covid-origins/index.html

The above article is quite a different point of view from what was being said by officials earlier in the pandemic. Again my point isn't to argue lab leak, but to say that if the establishment had it's way, this question would have been wiped away and never investigated. The complexity of the issue would have been lost to the public. That seems like censorship to me. Not book burning, but still censorship.

I 100% agree with your point about amplification though. That's a complication in the issue here because they are incentivised to push divisive, exreme views in order to drive engagement. There is a lot of discussion to be had there.

Regarding my mention of Hunter Biden, I wasn't lamenting that images of him were removed from social media. That's just basic cleaning up of feeds that needs to happen. I mean the fact that despite being verified by the FBI it was treated as bearing all of the hallmarks of Russian mis-information at the behest of other law enforcement agencies. It was then suppressed.

I don't know. You can assume that I'm parroting in bad faith if you want, but I hope you don't.

We're going to get nowhere if we can't call out the "my side" for their shit in a way that's consistent with how we call out "their side" on theirs...it's OK, I'm ready for the downvotes.

NFT's are a form of ownership (I know, I know, of a JPEG). If we leave out the scammy bullshit that NFT's have been in the past, then there are interesting things you can do with them. One company now is minting NFT plane tickets. The advantage is that if plans change or something you OWN that plane ticket, and could directly sell it on a seconary market or somthing. Another case would be for games. I personally like collector card games, like hearthstone and things like that. However when you play digital card games you never own shit. They could just close ownership down at any point...technically. with a set of NFT cards you 100% own it.

Beyond that, the ownership model in crypto can be empowering to users as well. One insurance company popped up that let you combine your funds with others directly in the form of their risk pools to provide the necessay function that insurance companies currently do and decreasing the amount of liquidity they have to maintain which can lower prices for consumers and provide for growth on your resources.

Not all of these things have succeeded. The main thing is a different take on ownership. Previously it has been that you give money to institutions and it's yours because you trust them. In crypto it's yours because that's how it's coded in the smart contract. I'm not a maximalist, but I think if that change can be capitalized on in certain cases it could work well.