I guess it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when this era of blockbuster inflation started, though every generation seems to have its own labels—at least in the West, where people love categorizing things just to make them easier to discuss. Speaking of which, there's a massive shift happening in Hollywood compared to how things used to be. Back in the day, movies were mostly made with the US market in mind, and international revenue was really just a nice little bonus on top of the core earnings. Even then, that extra cash mostly came from the same few places with deep pockets, like Western Europe, Australia, or Canada. But lately, the real money has been pouring in from East Asia, and ever since that happened, there's been this intentional "dumbing down" of everything produced with a massive budget. For instance, "Avengers 2" might pull in about $500 million here in the USA, but it brings in another billion from overseas. It's an incredibly simple concept, yet look at the sheer amount of money involved. You can't exactly sell something like "Schindler's List" to audiences in China; they aren't looking for stories tied strictly to specific Western history or traditions. Instead, what sells in China—just like it does in Korea, Thailand, or Mexico—are explosions. And clearly, Americans and Europeans are buying into it too. Creativity feels almost forbidden now, which makes sense if you look at the math. It's much more profitable for a studio to churn out ten mindless movies with zero effort than to gamble on one high-quality masterpiece. Ten mediocre films will move more tickets, and audiences seem happy to swallow whatever is served. When you consider that India and China alone account for 2.5 billion people, and adding the rest of Asia brings that closer to 4 billion, there's a massive, hungry audience waiting for more. This trend is probably just getting started.
I guess I was being a bit naive thinking this combination would actually work. It’s pretty tough to expect a team leader to have any real authority when they didn't really have it before the election. But hey, that's just politics, and authority is everything in this game. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a twist coming where the Republicans find enough people to reshuffle things, even with those 12 representatives from the Libertarian Party. 🤣 If that happens, I suppose leaders like Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan might step aside, though it's hard to say who would take over as President. Since the administration is already in place and everyone has likely settled into their roles, it doesn't seem worth breaking things up unless a new coalition emerges that can actually command a majority on its own. It seems like the elections just ended up this way—three parties that don't really like each other having to pair up just to make it work. I haven't even seen much bickering among the Cabinet members in the news lately, and I doubt they'd want to give up their positions this quickly.
That’s an interesting idea, honestly. Youth soccer where nobody is allowed to kick the ball a yard into the air, and now they're worried about heading. Only in America. I guess it won't be long before we see this become the norm, and maybe in 20 years, everyone will just be playing on turf with indoor domes because it gets too slippery when it rains.
I guess I wouldn't say the government is overspending right now, nor does it feel like we're wasting too much at the moment. We saw massive spending on huge infrastructure projects back in the days of Clinton or Bush, many of which felt unnecessary or overpriced. Right now, the deficit is mostly due to old debts and Social Security obligations. We're dealing with an aging population and unemployment issues, but we aren't the only ones in the US facing that. The math seems pretty straightforward: if government spending stays flat—which I assume it will—and the economy stabilizes and grows over the next few years, we should eventually hit a break-even point. That’s essentially the strategy being pushed by the current administration. The global market is a major driver here; you can really see exports climbing. More companies are finding their revenue through exports, and even our tourism industry acts like a form of export. It's a massive market with constant demand, especially since our labor costs remain competitive. If the government could just crack down on the shadow economy in the hospitality sector, the deficit would probably shrink by 50% overnight. Not exactly something to brag about, but over the last two summer seasons, I managed to book over 20 nights, my girlfriend booked another 20, and my friends booked at least 60 to 80 more between us. All of it was cash under the table without any taxes being reported. And then people talk about billions in revenue... honestly, you could probably double that number easily.
Cutting wages or Social Security would be a disaster; those are the primary drivers of consumer spending that keeps the budget flowing. Even in places like Greece, those "austerity" policies didn't really solve anything. Whether it's an individual, a group, or the whole country, the most important thing during a crisis is creating new streams of income. You can only cut spending so far before you run out of options, so what happens after that?
Look, it's nothing really exclusive. I travel to Scandinavia quite often, and while they have a Pride parade once a year, they also have neo-Nazi marches on one of the main squares in Stockholm once a year too. I guess there are just plenty of idiots everywhere.
I've been reading through some reviews and noticed they were pretty critical of it. Personally, I thought the movie was excellent, though I guess I don't quite get the backlash. It seems to me like people might have expected something miraculous given the subject matter, but what we saw on screen felt like a really honest portrayal of how things actually are. In a way, I know someone who went through a similar experience, and there wasn't much difference from what was depicted.
I guess it’ll happen now that ABC bought the rights; they probably feel the need to hype it up everywhere. Otherwise, it's just standard competition, kind of like items moving along a conveyor belt.
Robin Fox2 said:http://hop-portal.com/2016/01/zastup...-moral-crnoji/
I have no interest in debating whether this account is factual or not, though it remains entirely plausible that a person could simply vote for themselves, be the sole participant in doing so, and somehow emerge victorious... 😳
Judging by the other "reports" on that site and how often they bring up the FBI, I suspect maybe none of what's in that article is actually factual.
The minister has stepped down, which is a real shame. 😢 Fortunately, Tomislav Karamarko is still there, so at least we have someone honest on our side.
Honestly, I guess the Democratic Party would just reject everything they offer anyway. I mean, what kind of reforms is the Democratic Party actually working on or planning right now? Personally, it doesn't seem to make much sense for Bridge to team up with them, looking at the big picture. Bridge wants real change, and change usually means a shift in power. The Democratic Party didn't manage to clear out people like Mamić or that political zombie Bandić during their four years in charge. They talk a big game, but maybe they just couldn't get it done.
On a global scale, things aren't really shifting much. The core objectives and strategies remain pretty much the same—focusing on tourism, exports, EU funding, and balancing the budget. Five or six years ago, I might have felt differently, but honestly, I don't mind whether it's Milanović or Karamarko leading the way.
urbanhawk17 said:New elections didn't happen because Petrov probably realized he’d only scrape together a couple of seats, if he gets lucky enough to see another election at all. Honestly, if he’d called for new elections just a week after the last one, he might have actually picked up more seats, but waiting this long? Probably not. I guess my vote would have counted either way, but once they reached an agreement 🙄 with one of those coalitions, my influence vanished along with about 95% of everyone else's.
Personally, I don't much care whether it's the GOP or the Democratic Party, though I suppose I lean toward the Democrats, or at least the kind of perspectives the left should be representing.
As for them being a "corrective force," my ass. You know it as well as I do. They've basically become part of the furniture now. The general consensus seems to be that they just proved how impossible it is to maintain a third party in America, effectively killing any future chance for anyone else to try and pull a vote away from the big players.
It isn't impossible, but I guess they need more votes and better internal cohesion. With a standard political party, you might have an individual leave or get kicked out here and there, but most of the party soldiers stay loyal from start to finish. Bridge isn't really a traditional party.