• 0 Posts
  • 26 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle
  • I think it’s a group of obnoxiously self-righteous people who get to tell themselves that they’re taking real action to make a difference but really aren’t doing anything useful at all, and their stunts probably actively turn some people against environmental causes. They’re the exact same kind of people as the NIMBYs who pat themselves on the back for getting a new 50% affordable-housing apartment building canceled because it wasn’t 100% affordable.





  • I think it’s pretty solidly in the Tex-Mex category, which is so much more popular in America than actual Mexican food that “Mexican” is better considered a casual alternative to saying Tex-Mex. If you actually mean authentic Mexican, you should probably specify that, or even better, name the specific region. It’s normal to see a restaurant advertised as Oaxacan or Yucatan, for example.











  • The proper term is American.

    everybody born in the american continent is technically “american” too

    The implied context of your question is in English.. In the English-speaking world, there is no American continent. People from North America are North Americans; people from South America are South Americans. People from the United States of America are American. There is no ambiguity. There is also no good term to collectively describe everyone from the Americas but there’s also rarely any need to discuss that.

    I consider terms such as “USonian” and whatnot to be highly offensive. Nobody should tell a people what they are allowed to call themselves in their own language just because the same word means something else in another language. It would be like telling French people they’re not allowed to call their arm a bras because it refers to an article of clothing in English. Other languages where America means something else already have their own terms for people from the US. English, however, has no real ambiguity except that caused by those trying to shame Americans for calling themselves Americans.


  • Visa and Mastercard are not card issuers.

    Yes, I’m quite aware of that but you said “banks and credit card companies” so I also included, well, credit card companies.

    This article provides details of why Delaware is attractive to banks

    The article points out that all of those paperwork incorporations of companies that are nominally based in Delaware don’t equate to that many jobs because the companies are actually based elsewhere. Delaware is a bit player in the banking industry.

    Anyway, this is veering way off topic. The point is that Biden did not make student loans bankruptcy-proof. You can’t attribute bipartisan legislation to a single non-sponsor, minority-party member who happened to vote for it. I don’t care if he changed his middle name to “I love big banks.” The original statement was still ridiculous.


  • He was known for being very friendly to banks and credit card companies, as a Senator from Delaware would be inclined to be, considering that Delaware is home to many of those types of businesses.

    Is it? Visa is in San Francisco, Discover is in Illinois, and Mastercard and Amex are in New York.

    JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley are in New York. Bank of America is in Charlotte. Wells Fargo is in San Francisco. Those are the nation’s six largest banks. Delaware doesn’t make an appearance until #94 on the biggest bank list.

    Delaware is a popular state for essentially paperwork, due primarily to its efficient and well-established Chancery Court, but it’s not really a major player in the banking industry. There aren’t a many people or businesses in Delaware involved in banking beyond the local branch stuff in every community.


  • He was still only a single yes vote on a bill that only 25 Democrats voted against, and it most certainly was not his bill.

    The original claim was “Biden made Student Loans impossible to forgive via Bankruptcy.” You can argue that Biden could have or should have done more on the topic but attributing this solely to him is just ridiculous, and that’s before delving into the reasons why a senator with a reputation for working across the aisle and building consensus might strategically accept provisions he doesn’t really like in a bill in order to achieve other, higher priorities.