4
ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +4 / -0

You know, much of what I'm reading here sounds just like what liberals were saying during the Great Recession. Remember, when they were pushing for cost of living increases, higher minimum wages, and living wages?

I made the mistake of complaining once about how difficult it was to make ends meet (fresh out of college and unable to get a job) and was met with a lot of "Stop eating avocado toast and pull yourself up by your bootstraps."

Just wondering where all this compassion and empathy was back then. 🤷

5
ImaSueDeNym 5 points ago +5 / -0

I've always wondered what kind of calendars they used in Noah's time and exactly how long one of their "years" was.

They weren't using the same calendar as us, you know. The Gregorian calendar, which is what we use, was created in 1582.

And all the different countries all over the world have used different calendars of their own throughout the years.

We sometimes need to remember that not everything has existed as we know it today, and that includes how people mark the passage of time.

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

So you're ok with people coming to the US and staying here illegally?

Or is it only certain people you don't want to be in the US illegally?

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

And how would they be staying in the US legally, if they chose to ditch Australia and move here, because an investment bank chose to do away with dealing with checks and cash?

What makes you think some random person from Australia will be more worthy of immigrating to the US than, say, some random person from Mexico?

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

You could use your bank card to buy whatever it is of physical value, provided the place you wanted to buy it from accepted non-cash payments.

I think you're overthinking this a bit. It's no different than how you use banks when you use your debit card. You're simply not using checks or cash.

And if you absolutely needed to use cash, I suppose you could just transfer your money from this bank to another bank where you have an account that does give you cash, or use any ATM that accepts that bank's card. You'll just have to pay a transaction fee.

And I really don't understand your comments about items in safe deposit boxes. Do you think Macquarie is going to be confiscating items from safety deposit boxes you have and just add their value to your account with them? I'm not sure Macquarie even offers their customers safety deposit boxes. They're not commercial banks, from what I understand.

Why would they put a limit on what you can spend?

You do realize that almost 99% of the banking in the US (and likely all of Western society) is digital banking already, right? Very little banking is done with physical checks and cash.

That's really the only thing changing here. Physical checks and cash. They're not messing about with safe deposit boxes.

You can go straight to the source to look for whatever changes they're going to make in regards to fees or limits or such. I really don't have the time to research it for you. I'm not being rude, just truthful.

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing when we're talking about "digital".

Are you thinking along the lines of "crypto" when you're talking about "digital"?

Because from what I understand, the only difference will be that they no longer take cash deposits and they no longer give customers cash. And they will no longer accept or give anyone checks.

Other than that, nothing really changes.

4
ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +4 / -0

Just to provide some context:

There are only 4 "Big Banks" in Australia and Macquarie isn't one of them.

As someone else already commented, it's a small investment bank, not a consumer bank. So the public won't be affected much by this.

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +3 / -1

At one time, yes. But they've spent the past several years pulling their forces out of Africa.

And they haven't had any forces in the Congo for quite a while as far as I can tell.

So the country that we're talking about, the Congo, hasn't been controlled by the French in years.

1
ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +5 / -4

I'm not "griefing" you because you're a moderator.

I simply disagree with the wisdom of encouraging people to "detain" someone because they think they might be illegal.

And I think it's simply unfair to accuse someone of being a coward because they don't want to uproot their family to move across the country and join a militia.

Are you going to give me a ban because I disagree with your post?

4
ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +6 / -2

Uh huh. I take that as a "No, I'm not really patrolling the border like I'm encouraging others to do and criticizing you for not doing."

It's also easy to pretend to patrol the border in a state you already live in.

You really expect people to uproot their families and move across the country to do something that you're not doing when you live in a border state?

4
ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +6 / -2

So you're patrolling the southern border right now?

Which part are you patrolling? Did you already live near the border, or did you uproot your family to move there in order to do that?

3
ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +7 / -4

Though we can’t arrest or dart people and toss um back over, we can patrol, detain, and report to authorities.

And how are you going to tell if someone is here illegally? I really hope people aren't going to be running around "detaining" people based on their looks or because they speak Spanish.

If so, I can see that going sideways really quickly.

4
ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +4 / -0

Where else would China get all the rare earth minerals and other resources they need to manufacture all the cool stuff we buy on Amazon and at Walmart? 🤷

3
ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +3 / -0

Dunno.

But on the other hand, I see plenty of people here complain about living in the US, too.

They could do DNA tests, look at a map, and take a jet to which ever country they would like, as well. 🤷

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

I know that Operation Barkhane has been in effect this year, withdrawing French troops from all over Africa.

I wasn't aware they still had a lot of forces in the Congo, though. I'll have to look into that.

Edited to add: Well, I started looking into it, and Operation Barkhane ended last year. So I'm out of date on my info already.

I don't follow African politics as much as I should. I do know there have been several coups in some African countries this past year, and some people blame France for it, because they have been pulling their troops out of Africa.

Edited again to add: Still looking through all the info I can find on France's military bases in Africa, and I can't find any info about any bases they currently have in the Republic of Congo.

If anyone has any information about that, please share.

I'll keep looking, but right now, all signs point to "no" when it comes to France still having troops in the Congo.

3
ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wrong Congo. The Democratic Republic of Congo, or the DRC, is the country with the most cobalt mines in the world.

The Republic of Congo is the one that supposedly had the coup attempt. But they're denying it. And I don't think they have many, if any, cobalt mines.

12
ImaSueDeNym 12 points ago +12 / -0

Wrong Congo. The French settled the Congo. Belgium settled the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or the DRC.

It gets confusing, I know.

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, the government in charge there now, which is not France, is saying there has been no coup attempt, so....

But you're saying the French were trying to make a coup, by rigging their elections?

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm confused. Didn't they gain their independence from the French in the 1960s? Why would France have anything to do with them now?

That's like something happening in the Philippines and saying the US has some sort of responsibility to them for it.

2
ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's what they might be going after Trump with at some time, as well.

Apparently he has the habit of tearing papers in two when he's done reading them, and he had people on his staff who just taped the papers back together for the national archives and stuff.

If they want to punish him for tearing up official papers, they need to punish Biden's team for inserting the word "and" there.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›