Agreed.

Or maybe a cult of personality has you captured, preventing you from being able to see it from both sides point of view as I am doing.

You don’t have to agree with the other side in order to see it from their perspective.

From the article, sounds like they would only be using money made from the sale of the gold they already have. Basically, not spending any extra money, and in the end, just converting some gold to bitcoin. I’m not sure how the sale of gold certificates work.

You know what, the first time, I totally read your comment completely different than how you meant it. So my previous reply would have been different.

Even so, my comment was not disgusting, it was just using logic.

This line in the article made it sound like it already exists:

“This move, according to Hines, could be a budget-neutral way to increase the country’s Bitcoin reserves.”

The US has a bitcoin reserve? First I’ve heard of it. Whatever, but using gold to buy it makes no sense.

deleted by creator

lol, okay that’s funny. But there are people on both sides I’d give it to.

Everyone acting like its okay to burn up teslas of uninvolved people because you disapprove of what Musk is doing. Then you should have no argument against pro-lifers burning down abortion clinics because they disapprove of what the doctors there are doing. Just saying.

Web rings still exist, you just wouldn’t know it because search engines don’t show you the types of sites that use them, which is usually personal sites.

I sometimes use excite.com (oldschool) for searching, and get better results than the major ones, sometimes not. Most people have no clue its even still up. I haven’t dug much, so I don’t know much about its current state. Like tripod sites, how they still exist but are full of hidden junk.

There are tons of forums out there, the search engines just won’t show them to you. The search engines are the real problem.

Well, non-citizens aren’t protected under the first amendment. I agree though, he should be able to express his opinions without getting in trouble for it. But from the articles I read, it sounded like physical things happened at the protests. Maybe not from him specifically (I don’t know), but because he is not a citizen, he does not have all the same rights as a citizen. As it has been since before the current administration, if a non-citizen is suspected as a possible threat to the country based on speech alone, then the government deals with them, first by investigating the situation. The few articles I read were all general and not specific so I don’t know the full reason, or what he actually said at the protests. So I try not to make opinions on these things without plenty of info.

Yeah, there is a lot of corruption for sure. I think there needs to be a solid document of rights for non-citizens, both one for those here legally, and one for those here illegally. I do not think non-citizens should have all the same rights as citizens, because the citizens of a country should come first. And I would then say those who came legally should come second. But, a good country should want to treat people correctly, and so I do think non-citizens deserve some rights, to prevent them from being mistreated. But the current rights in the constitution are for citizens, unless they specify that they are for non-citizens.

To start, he is not a US citizen. Yes, he is here legally. But when you are not a citizen, you have to be more careful what you say, this is how it’s been since way before Trump became president. You do not have all the same rights as a citizen, when you are not a citizen. I read a couple articles about him, but I am not aware of what all happened with the previous protests, sounds like others got in trouble as well.

True true! But there’s a reason why I’ve only bought used.

No I am not, I’m knowledgeable of how Nazis today act.

“Oh no, what will we ever do if the federal government doesn’t set our standards? We are too dumb to set our own standards!”

I’m pretty sure the states can figure it out on their own. And any school can feel free to set their own standards even higher if they wish.

I was hoping it would, but this article does not show how the constitution applies to non citizens. It names many amendments that they say protect non citizens, but it does not show the constitution saying that those rights are for non citizens, the article just says they are.

Yeah, I’ll read it.

I’m not being snappy, but what part of the constitution are you talking about? Anything in specific?