Posts by Linda Hughes88

if everything really kicked off with Lin, then why on earth didn't we see that same kind of energy back in Chicago...🤷

cosmicseal5 said:🙄
Man, you guys are seriously getting on my nerves here...
Like, what is he even supposed to tell them during a timeout?
We're talking about elite athletes where you can't just draw up every single move on a whiteboard... That raw instinct and creativity is exactly what sets Ballica apart from some mindless drone who just follows a playbook to the letter. They play way above any rigid system, and they've proven that more times than I can count. Lino does exactly what needs to be done, which is fueling that brotherhood and psyching them up to give 120%... and honestly, he nails it every single time. Plus, tactically speaking, his work over the last two games has been nothing short of brilliant
What are we even talking about right now????
Are you really suggesting we swap out a coach who’s pulling results like this????😵
Besides, this isn't freaking American football where you need a million different set plays for everything...

Every serious team needs a foundation of set plays and practiced combinations, because if it's all just pure improvisation, then you don't even need a coach.
That sounds like the exact logic Červar used: "I'll handle the defense, and as for the offense... hey, you guys just figure it out however you want."

The US is absolutely killing it today
let's just hope Omeyer doesn't go totally rogue in the second half...
but man, that defense, once again 🙏🙏

That defense was absolutely insane!!!
Too bad we don't have someone like Steph Curry out there just burying shots from the logo whenever we need them...😁

Man, I really hope the Danes get taken down by the Germans so we can finally get some payback...

🙏🙏🎉🎉🎉
now comes the epic speech from the wizard to all the doubters... 😁

Sean Gonzalez95 said:Even when he was playing the pivot, Magnus would just take over the offense himself sometimes, though honestly, the US never really had a solid backcourt player like that... I mean, think about how many times Ivano Balić would just feed Vorhy or Sulic perfectly for an easy score, while Magnus didn't have that kind of setup... but man, he was impossible to mark up on the line... absolutely legendary on defense too... even without the ball, he'd fight tooth and nail just to find his spot, especially when you knew the whole defense was hyper-focused on him and Olson, leaving him basically out there on his own... seriously, imagine how much harder it is to play the center when the entire defense is glued to you or the pivot...

Wislander wasn't just stuck at pivot either, he actually transitioned into that role later after playing left wing, and the guy was a total beast through and through... he truly earned everything he got.

Chris Lopez59 said:it wasn't Dinart who stopped Balić, it was Bertrand Gilles

Look, Dinart never even let him get close to the line... every single time he tried to make a move, it just blew up right in his face, seriously...

I haven't really caught the French team playing in this European Championship, but man, if they show up with that same insane defense they had during the last World Championship and the refs actually let them play dirty, we are absolutely toast...
We aren't nearly as strong as we were back then, honestly, our offense looks totally lost right now, just making amateur mistakes left and right, and you have to remember how much harder it was to score back then because you could barely see Balic through all that contact from Dinart (it was basically a mix of handball defense and heavyweight boxing)... those easy strolls Balic used to take to the goal? Yeah, we can forget about those happening anytime soon. They were just forcing outside shots against that 3-2-1 defense even though it made zero sense...
So, there’s just no room for winging it or waiting on some spark of inspiration from Balic, we need pure discipline and set plays that actually work, especially for the wings, but we haven't seen any of that yet... unless, of course, the French aren't even a shadow of what the Germans were back in the day...

Nobody’s actually listening to Červar in this locker room... he says one thing, then Balić just goes and does whatever he wants, and you've got Lacković constantly pushing back because he feels like he hasn't even found his rhythm yet...

With dynamics like that, finishing fourth in Europe isn't even a total disaster... 😁

It honestly sucks when we run headfirst into an aggressive, physical, and super mobile defense that the refs just let slide... everything starts falling apart because things aren't flowing the way we planned, and suddenly everyone's getting on edge, forcing shots, and just straight-up panicking. We saw this happen against the Danes and the French too, which wasn't really the case before... back when we were playing the Germans, they stayed totally composed through the whole game.
If they can just play with some discipline, stay calm, and actually show some patience, they should be able to make a real run...

Chris Lopez59 said:Man, it's true... I mean, look at Metla back when he was tearing it up in Portugal, he was absolute class, just a total beast who could do everything from shut down plays on defense to rack up goals and assists like it was nothing... He was just unstoppable back then. At that same time, Ivan was this incredible playmaker and assist machine, but he wasn't really much of a scorer, and man, his defensive game definitely wasn't where it needed to be. Ivan definitely leveled up his game since then, but honestly, it looks like the years are finally starting to catch up with Metla...

😲
I literally just wrote the exact same thing over on the US-Denmark forum...

casualwolf12 said:Honestly, I didn't think I'd ever encounter an article quite this blatantly biased in my lifetime...
But then again, why should I be surprised? Given the current social climate, this kind of rhetoric—this outright denial of systemic issues—is exactly what thrives. It’s all part of the effort to continue peddling this myth of America as some flawless "land of opportunity" where poverty simply doesn't exist if you just work hard enough...

man, look, these numbers come straight from the Census Bureau. the authors didn't just pull them out of thin air.
so, if you happen to have some private agency over there that ran a similar study, feel free to show us what you've got. until then, I'm afraid you're stuck accepting the official data that backs up my point...or you can just keep denying it, which I guess is always the easiest way out...

casualwolf12 said:I have to wonder, exactly which reality are you inhabiting?

An urban poor resident in America typically lives in public housing—those so-called "projects" that are physically segregated from the wealthier districts—and they usually rely on social assistance, lack a reliable vehicle, and possess a fridge and perhaps a TV if they can manage to scrape the money together...
A rural poor resident in America typically resides in a trailer park, which is physically isolated from established neighborhoods, mostly subsisting on government aid, lacking a functional car, and owning a fridge and a TV only if they can afford it...

The "poor" person you are referring to, according to American standards, actually belongs to the middle or upper-middle class... and by American standards, yes...

Look, I'm talking about Americans who are actually living below the poverty line, so maybe do a little better digging into your data first😉

Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the U.S. Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in New York City, Washington, D.C., the United Nations, and other cities throughout North America. These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries.
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color Television ; over half own Two or more color televisions
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

casualwolf12 said:The "poor" person you are describing (the one who owns a car and can afford an economy class ticket) is actually part of the upper-middle class... these people view themselves as impoverished simply because they compare their lives exclusively to those earning more, all while the truly destitute remain completely marginalized and hidden from public view...
The Economist does a fine job of helping maintain the illusion that everything is functioning beautifully FOR EVERYONE, rather than just for those who already hold the cards... 👎

nah, that guy is what we consider poor by American standards. and that guy has a house and a car and a fridge and a TV and all that stuff.

and the ones who don't even have that are just a tiny fraction of the population...

overklokan had this pretty solid piece in The Economist a couple of months back... it was basically a response to that Krugman article in The New York Times warning everyone that the income gap between the rich and the poor in the USA is ballooning right back toward those insane levels we saw during the Gilded Age, you know, back when you had guys like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and J.P. Morgan running the show.
But here’s the thing The Economist argues—yeah, sure, the dollar amounts look massive, but what you can actually buy with that cash isn't nearly as different as it was back then. Back in the day, a rich guy had a car while the poor guy didn't, a rich guy had a fridge while the poor guy didn't, and it was the same story with phones and everything else... nowadays, the gap between the wealthy and the working class isn't even that drastic. Both sides drive cars—okay, fine, the rich guy's ride is nicer, but they both get you from point A to point B just the same, and both have fridges and TVs, even if one is flying economy and the other has a private jet... basically, the actual standard of living gap is shrinking...
and there's zero real connection between the ultra-wealthy and people who are literally starving to death. Handing out charity to those folks doesn't move the needle. It hasn't worked before, either. Look at how much aid has been poured into Africa and yet nothing really changes. The only things that actually make an impact are real investments, building factories, and stuff like that...
but once that finally happens, and once all 6.5 billion people on this planet are driving cars and eating half a cow every month, I bet you'll find some new reason to complain and start lecturing everyone about morality, won't you? 🙂

David Bennett53 said:Back in the day, wars were fought over living space, but today they are fought exclusively for resources needed by corporations to expand. Back then, these massive financial and military powers hadn't even formed yet, so clearly, they couldn't have been corporate!

If this doesn't apply just to modern times, look at the Opium Wars. That happened after the Chinese man tried to ban opium and got in the way of British monetary interests (which is where the roots of corporate thinking actually lie). Those wars crushed the uprising in blood, and in the 19th century, it established the Saasoon family as the rulers of the opium trade in Taiwan, effectively screwing over the Chinese people and establishing the world's first true drug corporation. Later, in 1915, Saasoon married Alan Rothschild (it's pretty obvious how they knew the Saasoons were smuggling opium
🤣) and thus—by some strange coincidence, I guess 🤣—the biggest drug smugglers merged with the greatest financial power in the world.

Over several hundred years of draining billions from China through opium, most of the British nobility and lords earned their titles specifically through the opium trade.

So much for the idea that historical wars "weren't corporate at all.".

As for oil, it's perhaps the dirtiest energy source imaginable. It was conceptualized right when Tesla and Murray were already experimenting intensely with free, clean energy. But that didn't suit the banking interests of the major energy mogul, J. P. Morgan. So, Tesla missed his chance to give the world clean energy, and Murray's lab was destroyed just to ensure the future of oil—meaning the bankers and investors—wasn't called into question.

There's that much regarding how "perfect" an energy source like oil isn't "artificial."

It's not a conspiracy to me; it's just good old dirty economics.

This whole argument is just pure nonsense... saying wars were only fought for "living space" is such a massive oversimplification of history. People have gone to war for a thousand different reasons, honestly—it could be anything from a ruler's ego and a desperate thirst for dominance to spreading a religion or some radical ideology. Then you've got the sheer terror of being invaded, the scramble for resources—both natural wealth and manpower—and eventually, that whole surge of nationalism... there's just so much more to it than that. I mean, look at Genghis Khan; he wasn't exactly just looking for a bit of extra room for his tribes when he conquered something like 7 million square miles... and even the Roman wars had this huge defensive component to them, not to mention a million other things I could go on about...
Your other point is totally flawed too. You’re basically claiming that modern wars are just corporate resource grabs to fuel expansion, but the problem is you’re starting with a theory and then desperately hunting for facts to fit it... Let’s actually look at the wars happening today. Take the war in Iraq, for example—if your logic holds, that would mean it was fought just because American corporations needed more oil, right? That's the idea you're pushing. But here's the thing: American companies aren't even the ones pumping the oil in Iraq. You won't find Exxon, Chevron, or ConocoPhillips operating there. Almost all the oil in Iraq is controlled by their own national company, and when it comes to foreign players, you've got someone like the Canadian company MOL involved... there was even a chance for Exxon to get a piece of the action, but they passed on it. So, if anything, it looks like the Canadians are the ones who actually pushed the Americans into that conflict...
Let's keep this rolling... Afghanistan, man. Which corporation is actually pulling the strings there and what kind of resources are they really after? Then you look at the wars that tore through the old American territories... again, which corporations were involved and what was the real prize? And don't even get me started on Rwanda! Who were the corporations then? What resources were they hunting for... 😵

The whole thing about Tesla and Murray is just a joke... honestly, let’s stop with the myths and that third-rate sci-fi nonsense. "Pure energy"? Please. If Tesla had actually stumbled upon some magic way to power the world, we’d be using it right now, plain and simple. But he didn't. Millions of physicists have tried to replicate those ideas over the years and they all hit a brick wall... claiming it's some massive conspiracy by banking and oil lobbies is just straight-up bullshit, especially when you look at how much our energy mix has changed anyway. Sure, big oil companies might not love competition, and they can lobby until they're blue in the face, but nuclear plants exist despite them, and we have all these alternative sources like wind turbines—even if they're cleaner, they're way more expensive to pull off. And I mean, really, how much "green" impact are you actually making if you try to cover the entire California coastline in wind turbines? It's not even practical because the wind only blows hard enough in specific spots, which means you have to deal with storage issues, and that just drives the cost of electricity through the roof... There's always a new "miracle" idea, like ten years ago when everyone was obsessed with biofuels; every environmental group was pushing it without a single thought about the consequences, if you ask me. Now that hype has totally fizzled out. Food prices skyrocketed because of it, and even with government subsidies, that fuel isn't any cheaper than the gas you buy at the pump today. At the end of the day, oil is still king because we actually need it, simply because there aren't any other solutions out there that are actually good enough... everything else is just burying your head in the sand...

Yeah, look, wars actually started with corporations. Before all that, there weren't even real wars—you know, those massive Greco-Persian conflicts, the Crusades, the Thirty Years' War, or even the Hundred Years' War... those were all just corporate fabrications.
oil is obviously just a manufactured necessity because, honestly, what kid is gonna choose driving a car, taking a train, or flying in a plane when you could just use carriages and horses? It's the exact same thing, really... we shouldn't be using combines or tractors or any of that heavy machinery instead of just relying on good old Sherrill to pull everything along while dropping some organic fertilizer so we don't have to deal with artificial stuff. 😵

rustymaker5 said:Well, look, if you believe the idea that global events are being steered by some shadowy cabal of maybe three hundred people... or even fewer, as some suggest... then we can definitely call those folks "individuals" who are profiting, especially when you consider there are 8 billion people out there on this planet...

yeah, the Committee of 300.☕

dark stuff!!🙏🙏🙏

sorry to crash this super deep and brilliant discussion, but I gotta know... who are the actual people making bank off all this? thanks!