Dasus
@Dasus@lemmy.world
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 2 hours ago:
Well it clearly wasn’t, so we can only deduce it felt like that to you, meaning I must have hit a sensitive spot — again.
The only way for you to make me be in error about anything is to actually reply to the question; the one thing you can not do.
“Congrats, you’ve played yourself.”
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
Check-mate.
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 2 hours ago:
Yeah I will.
Because I can talk about the topic of the thread and you can’t. Every single reply shows how stubborn you are, in a proudly ignorant way. “Whenever I lose a debate, I refuse and have a tantrum instead.”
The longer you do it, the longer it’ll show on your user profile. You’ll claim not to care, but ofc you do.
And the question is so simple, one or the other, so it’s not like you can seriously pretend you haven’t read it several times and are just petulantly refusing to answer, because you know you’d either have to admit I’m right or pick the stupid option. And you’re not capable of either.
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
If you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud (“heroin” and “heroine” being homophones) means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 2 hours ago:
Oh wow, spun the wheel and it came out to "rather than simply answering, reply, but make sure you didn’t actually even care to reply and didn’t even bother to read the comment on the thread you compulsively return to.
I’m not writing these things for you man. :D
You can’t answer the simple question when you started this thread and I told you why you are wrong;
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
>“[female celebrity] is my heroine!” >OR >“[female celebrity] is my hero!” >If you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud (“heroin” and “heroine” being homophones) means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 3 hours ago:
You feel a compulsion to answer. Your ego just isn’t able to let this go. Yet you can’t answer a simple question.
Case in point.
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
If you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud (“heroin” and “heroine” being homophones) means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 3 hours ago:
You may not realise but it genuinely doesn’t matter what you write.
You coming back each time, but being too scared to address the subject, answer any questions, produce any rhetoric, shows everyone how I’m in the right. And each reply you add just makes that more evident. You wrote you found it “impressive” that it’s gone “this long.” This is a few days. I’ve been in threads like this for weeks, because I’m not getting shamed. I’m using a forum an actually sticking to the topic.
You’re just answering because of some childish obsession. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Feel free to prove me wrong at any time by answering the question.
- Comment on Just think about it 18 hours ago:
Well, thanks for far improving my point with superior elucidation of how it would be actually done.
I thought home ownership as well, but then I thought he’d start complaining about house markets and insurance and whatnot. But we know that realistically it would be beyond easy to make 100 million grow.
thanks again
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 18 hours ago:
See, as I annoy you a couple of times about how it’s gonna look so dumb on your profile just spamming “k” and “didn’t read” obsessively while clearly being ashamed of having been wrong and having to desperately avoid the subject, then you turn into the armchair psychology. Like I’ve said, you think you’re being original, but you’re genuinely repeating the same exact script I’ve seen thousand of times for years on Reddit and the forums I used before that.
You’re just afraid to own up to your mistakes. That’s all. I can talk about the topic of the thread. You can’t. That’s all anyone needs for proof that I’m 100% correct. <3
Here, prove me wrong by answering the question;
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
See if you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
No matter how much attempt you put into it, you could never even get close to “winding me up”. But thanks for letting me know how you feel through that projection. ;)
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 21 hours ago:
I mean, you’re forbidding it from yourself, but for some reason still obsessing over having to reply to this thread. If only you knew just how common that precise act is.
Like I said, you’ll try to get the last word and you won’t. At one point or another you’ll get fed up and accept the L you have already taken.
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 23 hours ago:
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
Little crotchgoblin too scared to answer a simple question?
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
You think you’re onto something here. But you’re literally having a tantrum. Why are you in this thread when you can’t say anything? ;>
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
Let’s be honest, ofc you’ve read those sentences. I’ve spammed them quite a lot.
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
It’s just that you don’t want to answer that, because it’d prove you wrong, and that’s not something you’re capable of accepting. Just like losing in general, because you think you’ll “win” this if you get “the last word.”
This isn’t about you taking an L. You’ve already taken it, way back. Now it’s just about you coming to terms with it. <3
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
Yeah, my point here being that even with the puniest of interest rates, you’d still make more than enough just off the interest to live somewhat comfortably. And in reality, you’d make millions and you’d have so much you could risk a little of it while still having those safe investments yielding all the time.
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
That’s a great argument. Very convincing, and certainly proves that you were right in the subject matter of this thread.
What was it again, could you remind me? Oh, you can’t? Because you’re for some reason thinking you’re gonna get the last word. You’re honestly not. You’re just gonna publicly shame yourself by this childish tantrum.
See you think I’m gonna give up. I’ve been threads like these for months. I don’t have to give up, since I can talk about the subject, but you can’t. :)
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
Looking great on your profile my man.
Really makes you seem credible to everyone going to check it from any other threads you might engage in. ;>
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
You’re not making any sense. You said to seek out a fiduciary not an advisor. Now you’re claiming that some time in the past, which would be distant past btw,
That’s the link you just linked in your previous comment. Your link.
Hmm, what’s that first sentence there? Didn’t bother to get past the title, did you? :(
Until relatively recently, the term “financial advisor” was used to describe various positions across the financial industry.
The Reg BI is from 2020.
So to you “relatively recently” actually means “the distant past”?
I wish you well in your studies, but you really are just sorely wrong about this, and now you’re just having a tantrum and trying to assert knowing more, while actually linking evidence supporting how I’m in the right and how I understand that you need a financial advisor who has a fiduciary duty towards you — something which not all financial advisors had until five years ago. See in my language, you wouldn’t even understand the words (and Google translate does not work well on Finnish.)
At no point has anyone made the argument that financial advisors don’t need skill. But see they’re financial ADVISORS, because they don’t have the capital to invest.
You’re explicitly saying that you couldn’t make reliably make 100k roi on 100 million? Man, I hope you didn’t pay for your schooling (here in the first world we have free education :P), because if you did, you really need to go and ask for your money back and spend it more wisely.
The money makes the money, as we live in a system of exploitation of labour. The megawealthy cumstains are also exploiting the work of the financial advisors, duh. The megawealthy cumstains still can make hundreds of thousands a year because CAPITAL MAKES CAPITAL.
Squirm all you want you’re just utterly wrong and can’t address the actual argument anymore so all you have is that childish and pretentious equivocating.
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
Again, ignoring the actual arguments to pretend like I’m not making sense.
I’m laughing out loud at the irony of you talking about strawmen. You keep assuming we’re gonna work in America, when I’ve explicitly stated hypotheticals in Europe. But someone might not have the understanding of European financial institutions, would they? And so they’d desperately cling on to the pretense that they hold some arcane secrets with their asinine avoidance of reality. What you’re doing is equivocating. (I know you’ll have to use a dictionary. :/)
You know exactly why that standardisation is happening. But you’re pretending as if I should know the most recent developments in the US, when you don’t even understand the very basics of European banking? Seems like a bit of a hypocritical strawman. ;DD
Clearly the point I’m making there is that just like chiropractors, “financial advisers” didn’t used to have a fiduciary duty. They’re fixing the problem I was talking about. Which you pervert into pretending like I have no idea what I’m talking about. It’s utterly ridiculous.
This is my third language. What if I were to be as ethnocentric as you? Oh right, you would seize to have the ability to communicate with me due to you not speaking my language, but me being able to speak your language. Now when I was in business school like fucking 20 years ago, shit was kinda different. That doesn’t matter though, as the **basic argument you’re making is ridiculous ESPECIALLY for someone who seems to (at least attempt to) work in the financial sector.
You’re saying explicitly that it wouldn’t be trivial for someone with a fiduciary duty towards you to make you 100k when you give them 100 mil to play with? Just how shit of a finance person are you if can’t do 100k roi on 100 mil (and yes, of course everything has small risks, but again, aside from the entire world economy crashing)? :D
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
“why you think its magic”
Nothing magical about earning money.
It’s beyond trivial.
You should never hire a financial advisor. That’s like going to see a chiropractor for back pain. What one needs is a fiduciary. And hiring one when you’ve a 100 million is beyond trivial. And a fiduciary making 100k with a 100 million is beyond trivial.
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
See if you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
You’re not gonna get the last word. I can repeat my argument, you can only spam “didn’t read lol.” Which do you think looks more ridiculous after a few weeks of this back-and-forth?
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
You’re just afraid to argue this because you know I’m right.
It’s beyond trivial to get a ~100k yearly roi on 100 million.
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
“This is purely the intro to my garbage avoidance of reality.”
I don’t need to hear the rest.
The reality is that should someone give you a 100 million and you’re of normal intelligence, have no substance abuse issues or debts or anything of the like, it’d be trivial to invest some of that money into hiring professionals who know what they’re doing, and that your only requirements are to get, idk 100k a year to use for yourself, and to have it as safe as possible.
You disagree that that would be trivial to do? Soo… avoiding reality it is then.
We’re not talking about investing the money to “make money” in the sense that proper investors would with 100k that they would invest in what they deem to be worth the risk. They expect decent roi for that sort of money. But we’re talking about roi that would be enough to sustain a person living very moderately.
That’s literally not an issue at all. Although I used “Swiss banks” as a meme, because I know you won’t understand the nuances of European institutions and Swiss banks would probably actually charge for holding that money, so you’d want to put it in a German bank more so than a Swiss one. But there’s tons of safe options for just putting it in and being able to make HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of interest a year.
And your argument is that “no no you can’t do that what if the world economy collapses completely and money has no money left, huh? then you won’t have your interest if there’s no money in the world!” (I remember someone mentioning “strawmen” earlier…)
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
Nothing is completely safe, but it’s ridiculous that you’re pretending like it’d be any issue to make 100 million grow if you magically got a sum like that.
Yeah, the FDIC is a an American institute. Most Swiss banks don’t deal with Americans.
What you’re talking about is actively investing. I’m using “invest” in it’s basest form.
What is it that you think is so unsafe in slopping a 100 million to a Swiss bank account? Like ofc, nothing is completely risk free, but looking at their history and reliability, what do you specifically think would happen to it? The banks crash?
Get on out of here with your inane libertarian “look I’m a big man in teh money game” bullshit. You’re literally trying to argue that it wouldn’t be completely trivial to make that kind of money grow.
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
You voluntarily keep coming back to reply to this, purely because you can’t handle the thought of admitting to a mistake or a silly thing you may have said.
I’m just bored, and I genuinely think this is a lesson worth teaching you.
You simply can’t address the actual argument anymore. You had a lot to say earlier. Can’t stand behind your own words or “arguments” now?
So… here’s the coup de grâce;
Which one of the following English sentences would you use to express admiration and adoration of a person?
“[female celebrity] is my heroine!”
OR
“[female celebrity] is my hero!”
See if you use the first one, as your rhetoric implies you want to, and think everyone should participate in this needless gendering, then you’re implicitly saying you don’t understand that saying “x is my heroin” outloud means you’re addicted to something instead of admiring it (and that you don’t understand that “hero” is the colloquially used form).
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
If there was a purely safe way to invest everyone would be a millionaire.
No, they wouldn’t, because investing requires you to have something to invest.
I don’t understand why youre fighting against very obvious facts. Money makes money.
Quite literally. You’re pretending as if it wouldn’t be safe slopping 100 mil into a Swiss bank account, given you’re not American and that 100 million was rightfully yours.
“You’ve created a strawman”. No need, honestly. Your trying to argue that it’s not incredibly easy to generate passive income for life if had a 100 million to invest.
That’s just patently untrue.
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
My bad I was on mobile that was meant for another and I just clicked the wrong reply from notifications. Whops
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
A lot of words for saying “you’re right that one can very safely invest that kind of money and thus I was wrong in saying money doesn’t just generate money, when it very literally does”.
“I pointed a gun at a guy and asked to fuck him in the arse and he just seemed to agree without question. That doesn’t make me a rapist, it makes him a slut.”
Honestly I couldn’t come up with more hilarious victim blaming if I tried. 5/5 for trolling as a deeply brainwashed libertarian fucknut.
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
Does designing a skyscraper take more skill than managing the lunch rush at a McDonald’s?
I feel like it’d honestly be hard to compare, because it’s such a vastly different skillset/task.
It’s like the differences between writing a technical manual and wrangling a clowder of cats on crack.
With enough education, care and time, anyone could probably achieve the first (even if you suck at it, you can just do it again until it’s acceptable, there’s no rush), but even attempting the second takes a certain…je ne sais quoi.
- Comment on Just think about it 1 day ago:
To be able to actually consistently make money off of money isn’t magical, it doesn’t happen automatically
Ever heard of interest? Savings accounts?
Say you just have 100 million sitting in a bank account. The average national savings account interest rate (and you’d get a much better one with 100 million) is 0.42 APY.
So you’d get $420,000 in interest every year.
If it did everyone would be far wealthier.
No, the rich would be richer. It’s expensive to make money, but very simple if you have a lot of it. Those without the capacity will keep getting poorer. You can shift the margins by taking more risks, obviously, but you can just make moneys for free when you already have enough for everything you need.
And hmm how is the trend going?
oxfam.org/…/ten-richest-men-double-their-fortunes…
Oh, right.
- Comment on Google is now forcing gemini in their gmail app 1 day ago:
Did as asked. Failed to see where the fun is? (I’m not being offensive, I just missed a joke and would like in on it.)
- Comment on Google is now forcing gemini in their gmail app 1 day ago:
I think it’s from “Google Workspaces” that you have to remove it from.
I have it on my phone and occasionally it think I’m asking it to do something like writing an email and then it’ll say I have to enable Gemini in Google Worspaces or something.
Idk hope I’ve provided some info idk
- Comment on Anon gets rid of crackheads 1 day ago:
Why do you reply when you can’t stand behind your own words?
Seriously. I’ve seen this exact behaviour thousands of times. You’d be shocked at how exactly you’re dancing to the same tune I’ve seen a million times.
Eventually you always give up. Why? Because I won’t, because I’m in the right and unlike you, there’s nothing I’m desperately avoiding :)