Unpacking Ray Dalio's Alarmist Prediction Of Civil Warwww.zerohedge.com/political/unpacking-ray-dalios-alarmist-prediction-civil-war
426 sats \ 14 comments \ @lpop4254 20 May bitcoin
write
preview
related posts
30 sats \ 6 replies \ @Car 20 May
Told you he was a communist @k00b Bridgewater has heavy bags in China. Now he's trying to scare the average working American.
reply
20 sats \ 5 replies \ @k00b 20 May
I know he has China bags. You said that makes him a communist and anti-American.
reply
10 sats \ 4 replies \ @Car 20 May
Now he is inciting a civil war to secure his bags.
reply
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 20 May
Predicting something is not inciting something.
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Car 20 May
It's called to cause harm.
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 20 May
If I predict a hurricane am I trying to cause harm or prevent it?
Dalio can be your boogey man if you want, but your feelings about his intentions are just feelings.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 20 May
You would be a weatherman. Using data and analysis. It's the same thing.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @TNStacker 20 May
The only question is how many more conflicts will it take for us to start calling these times WWIII. Readers of history in the future will say it started in the 2010s.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @zuspotirko 20 May
Doomer wants attention
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Nuttall 20 May
I tried to read Ray Dalio's book, whatever it was. I couldn't finish it.
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinAbhi 20 May
35 to 40 is an alarming odd. But we can still not have it as the odds are against it. But a good article overall! Thanks for sharing
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @bitties 20 May
It’s also never going to happen. Bunch of lazy spoiled brats.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @teemupleb 20 May
The risk of being misgendered would be too strong in the army. And how would they make sure that everybody would be addressed with their correct pronouns? I doubt you can get an iced matcha soy latte in the army either.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @netstatic 20 May
The anti-federalists were opposed to the Constitution not because they disapproved of its weak federal government and demanded something stronger, something more like what we have today, but because they disapproved of a federal government at all. In other words, the vision Dalio now derides and implies is the precursor to civil war was, in fact, the most radically centralized of the forms of government considered by the Founders.
I think he made a typo and meant decentralized in the last sentence of the quoted paragraph. Having no federal government and more state rights would not lead to more centralization.
reply