2
Pepe-le-Queue 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes! Was wondering if someone was gonna bring up the Younger Dryas...

4
Pepe-le-Queue 4 points ago +6 / -2

You know John, whenever you speak like you know what's gonna happen, it kinda freaks me out a little. Not gonna lie... Cheers, time traveller

P.S. On the off chance you might know about the past, how old are the great Giza pyramids anyhow?

2
Pepe-le-Queue 2 points ago +2 / -0

"It's Michael"... kek! 😂🤣😂

2
Pepe-le-Queue 2 points ago +2 / -0

I've actually known two people named Mike Hawk. Also another guy named Mile Hunt. Were the parents asleep at the switch, or stoned, or.... 🤷‍♂️

3
Pepe-le-Queue 3 points ago +3 / -0

Can relate, and I have done basically the same. It's harrassment at this point from 99% of them. Was having a hard time seeing actual important texts (and email) 'from friends family, and work. Sometimes emergencies.

2
Pepe-le-Queue 2 points ago +2 / -0

There are similar things on this very forum that if you even dare bring up you will trigger Agent Smith and be banned.

1
Pepe-le-Queue 1 point ago +1 / -0

I had this theory. I don't know if it would work. What if there was no rental property? And no buying and selling property like we currently do. Instead you basically mortgaged property from the owner (no bank). Maybe some incentive could be worked out between the seller and buyer (formerly landlord and tenant) such that they split these annually assessed prop tax costs. Of course it would be nice to get rid of that (since that was the whole point of this thread), and this arrangement would make banks unnecesarry (yay!). Perhaps houses are traded with "property shares" instead of the base currency, and the shares' values are based on market demand (location location location) and these shares can be bought and sold in some sort of property stock market. When you get to 51% of shares, you are the majority owner or something (or lawmakers/voters pick some threshold everyone agrees on) and can do what you want with the property (live in it, "rent" it, etc.) If a buyer (tenant) moves out, he/she can either sell their shares back to the seller (landlord) or sell them on the market for cash. The amount you pay in taxes is based on how many shares you own. Dividends are also paid out per share, perhaps trading those for physically living there once or once you pass the threshold. So if you lived there, your "rent" pays the dividends to the sharerolders. Or maybe you are contractually bound to pay some agreed number of shares to the 51% owner, and the "property taxes" or what that formerly was in the old syatem are what pays the dividends. The "renter" pays by buying shares and paying the "property tax" (there being no more tax to the government for this), and cannot recieve dividends from their shares until they pass 51% threshold. This way a "landlord" could generate income with their property by either selling shares in the market up to 49% to stay in their house and still recieve dividends from their shares(similar to a reverse mortgage), or "rent it out" and have a "tenant" (seller) live there if the owner is able to relocate somewhere else (i.e. had >51% stake in multiple dwelling properties)

I dunno just a thought. Need to hash the details out, but could that work? Downsides? Upsides? Worth it?

1
Pepe-le-Queue 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you seen the roads in California lately? Highest state taxes too.

2
Pepe-le-Queue 2 points ago +2 / -0

Slyver you fricken' ROCK! Wish there were more folks thinking like you...

5
Pepe-le-Queue 5 points ago +5 / -0

A fly in the ointment indeed...

If not specifically defined, NCSWIC is always a true statement.

Another thing that always bugged me: "Dark to light" - possibly an illuminati, i.e a luciferian, (as in "the light bearer") slogan. Certainly open to counter-arguments here, but it's a bit ominous and concerning. Q, if you're lurking here, put our minds at ease, please.

3
Pepe-le-Queue 3 points ago +3 / -0

Holy shit that is mind-blowingly brilliant!

4
Pepe-le-Queue 4 points ago +5 / -1

They always show up here and seem to attack the first and most potent posts about this topic in any given thread. Notice lack of downvotes on follow-on comments. Some sort of bots? Agents Provocateurs? Intel Agents? (If you watch the vid, this prospect gets pretty spooky indeed)

7
Pepe-le-Queue 7 points ago +7 / -0

Love WF, and that's a great episode. Here's another great thing to listen to on a log trip, the most recent Dark Journalist vid on the assassination attempt: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x--u3jR7fvo

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›