Capitalist Oppressor
@capopp.bsky.social
Resist or die.
#FBR
Follow capopp2.bsky.social if this account goes silent
#FBR
Follow capopp2.bsky.social if this account goes silent
Here are current examples. A year ago $4 off $20 was $3 off $15. Same percentage decrease, but on worse terms and with higher underlying prices.
The equivalent $1 off coupons a year ago purchased those items for $1.
So spend $5 get a $3 sandwich for $1. Now it’s $3.50 and $2.50 after discount.
The equivalent $1 off coupons a year ago purchased those items for $1.
So spend $5 get a $3 sandwich for $1. Now it’s $3.50 and $2.50 after discount.
November 10, 2025 at 5:38 AM
Here are current examples. A year ago $4 off $20 was $3 off $15. Same percentage decrease, but on worse terms and with higher underlying prices.
The equivalent $1 off coupons a year ago purchased those items for $1.
So spend $5 get a $3 sandwich for $1. Now it’s $3.50 and $2.50 after discount.
The equivalent $1 off coupons a year ago purchased those items for $1.
So spend $5 get a $3 sandwich for $1. Now it’s $3.50 and $2.50 after discount.
Also I am not sure how they treat semi-permanent promotions which are still just promotions.
Current example at Wendy’s that includes the wreckage of previous promotions. ie Biggie Bag and 444 promotions.
444 means 4 items for $4 and the biggie bag was a $5 upsell 2 years ago.
Current example at Wendy’s that includes the wreckage of previous promotions. ie Biggie Bag and 444 promotions.
444 means 4 items for $4 and the biggie bag was a $5 upsell 2 years ago.
November 10, 2025 at 5:34 AM
Also I am not sure how they treat semi-permanent promotions which are still just promotions.
Current example at Wendy’s that includes the wreckage of previous promotions. ie Biggie Bag and 444 promotions.
444 means 4 items for $4 and the biggie bag was a $5 upsell 2 years ago.
Current example at Wendy’s that includes the wreckage of previous promotions. ie Biggie Bag and 444 promotions.
444 means 4 items for $4 and the biggie bag was a $5 upsell 2 years ago.
If this is the deal it appears to set up Dems to shut the government down again (potentially repeatedly) after the holidays, with carve outs for Congress, the VA, FDA, and DOA.
If this is what they do it will reset the clock and we can try to roll into another shutdown Jan 31.
If this is what they do it will reset the clock and we can try to roll into another shutdown Jan 31.
November 9, 2025 at 11:19 PM
If this is the deal it appears to set up Dems to shut the government down again (potentially repeatedly) after the holidays, with carve outs for Congress, the VA, FDA, and DOA.
If this is what they do it will reset the clock and we can try to roll into another shutdown Jan 31.
If this is what they do it will reset the clock and we can try to roll into another shutdown Jan 31.
To the extent this is the deal it seems like an interesting idea.
A few agencies get funded in a way so that they are not impacted by future shutdowns.
But most of the government can be shutdown again after the holidays.
A few agencies get funded in a way so that they are not impacted by future shutdowns.
But most of the government can be shutdown again after the holidays.
November 9, 2025 at 10:50 PM
To the extent this is the deal it seems like an interesting idea.
A few agencies get funded in a way so that they are not impacted by future shutdowns.
But most of the government can be shutdown again after the holidays.
A few agencies get funded in a way so that they are not impacted by future shutdowns.
But most of the government can be shutdown again after the holidays.
Real wages are adjusted by CPI, but CPI is a broader measure of inflation than that experienced by poor people, whose budgets are dominated by food and housing.
November 8, 2025 at 1:35 AM
Real wages are adjusted by CPI, but CPI is a broader measure of inflation than that experienced by poor people, whose budgets are dominated by food and housing.
It’s a short article. I think increasing market power is a major issue. But I also think that GDP is understated in many ways.
This was one of their ideas.
But I think our privileged position in the dollar based trading system also tends to make GDP be understated relative to resource consumption
This was one of their ideas.
But I think our privileged position in the dollar based trading system also tends to make GDP be understated relative to resource consumption
November 3, 2025 at 8:33 PM
It’s a short article. I think increasing market power is a major issue. But I also think that GDP is understated in many ways.
This was one of their ideas.
But I think our privileged position in the dollar based trading system also tends to make GDP be understated relative to resource consumption
This was one of their ideas.
But I think our privileged position in the dollar based trading system also tends to make GDP be understated relative to resource consumption
That our net national wealth is growing is good. We are getting richer (or some subset of us are anyways).
But GDP isn’t keeping up, and I think this imbalance is both a symptom of deeper problems as discussed in Ryan’s thread, but also begins to create knock on effects for everyone who isn’t rich.
But GDP isn’t keeping up, and I think this imbalance is both a symptom of deeper problems as discussed in Ryan’s thread, but also begins to create knock on effects for everyone who isn’t rich.
November 3, 2025 at 8:26 PM
That our net national wealth is growing is good. We are getting richer (or some subset of us are anyways).
But GDP isn’t keeping up, and I think this imbalance is both a symptom of deeper problems as discussed in Ryan’s thread, but also begins to create knock on effects for everyone who isn’t rich.
But GDP isn’t keeping up, and I think this imbalance is both a symptom of deeper problems as discussed in Ryan’s thread, but also begins to create knock on effects for everyone who isn’t rich.
Mmm, this is all good advice for Dems 😈
November 2, 2025 at 2:35 AM
Mmm, this is all good advice for Dems 😈
I wonder if someone made a mistake in the statement or if the press misunderstood?
The story makes much more sense if it is the fuel tank for the motorcycle, or even if the motorcycle was carrying extra fuel for a long distance trip.
The story makes much more sense if it is the fuel tank for the motorcycle, or even if the motorcycle was carrying extra fuel for a long distance trip.
October 24, 2025 at 10:05 PM
I wonder if someone made a mistake in the statement or if the press misunderstood?
The story makes much more sense if it is the fuel tank for the motorcycle, or even if the motorcycle was carrying extra fuel for a long distance trip.
The story makes much more sense if it is the fuel tank for the motorcycle, or even if the motorcycle was carrying extra fuel for a long distance trip.
Umm, sorry, but probably no. This doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
Bus looks diesel. Tank is not in front. Just no.
More likely gas from rupturing fuel tank of the motorcycle sprayed underneath the bus and ignited an undercarriage coated by oil/hydraulic fluid/road grime.
Fuel tank came later.
Bus looks diesel. Tank is not in front. Just no.
More likely gas from rupturing fuel tank of the motorcycle sprayed underneath the bus and ignited an undercarriage coated by oil/hydraulic fluid/road grime.
Fuel tank came later.
October 24, 2025 at 9:56 PM
Umm, sorry, but probably no. This doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
Bus looks diesel. Tank is not in front. Just no.
More likely gas from rupturing fuel tank of the motorcycle sprayed underneath the bus and ignited an undercarriage coated by oil/hydraulic fluid/road grime.
Fuel tank came later.
Bus looks diesel. Tank is not in front. Just no.
More likely gas from rupturing fuel tank of the motorcycle sprayed underneath the bus and ignited an undercarriage coated by oil/hydraulic fluid/road grime.
Fuel tank came later.
I didn’t realize Hillary Clinton was the first politician to encourage their supporters to fight harder to achieve their goals. 🙄
October 24, 2025 at 5:30 AM
I didn’t realize Hillary Clinton was the first politician to encourage their supporters to fight harder to achieve their goals. 🙄
If I block them I don’t see amazing stuff like this
October 17, 2025 at 11:15 PM
If I block them I don’t see amazing stuff like this
This is all 100% true. They are tightening their control. They are getting more aggressive.
But I also think it’s true that they are way behind the curve on their authoritarian project, and they are getting more aggressive because pro-democracy forces are rapidly gaining momentum.
But I also think it’s true that they are way behind the curve on their authoritarian project, and they are getting more aggressive because pro-democracy forces are rapidly gaining momentum.
October 15, 2025 at 8:40 PM
This is all 100% true. They are tightening their control. They are getting more aggressive.
But I also think it’s true that they are way behind the curve on their authoritarian project, and they are getting more aggressive because pro-democracy forces are rapidly gaining momentum.
But I also think it’s true that they are way behind the curve on their authoritarian project, and they are getting more aggressive because pro-democracy forces are rapidly gaining momentum.
I see no reason not to do this.
Getting to Oct 18 is a minimum goal that assumes Dems are playing a losing hand.
But, so far at least, that doesn’t seem to be the case. So why stop?
That Trump is threatening to DOGE the government again is exactly why they need to keep fighting.
Getting to Oct 18 is a minimum goal that assumes Dems are playing a losing hand.
But, so far at least, that doesn’t seem to be the case. So why stop?
That Trump is threatening to DOGE the government again is exactly why they need to keep fighting.
October 10, 2025 at 11:54 PM
I see no reason not to do this.
Getting to Oct 18 is a minimum goal that assumes Dems are playing a losing hand.
But, so far at least, that doesn’t seem to be the case. So why stop?
That Trump is threatening to DOGE the government again is exactly why they need to keep fighting.
Getting to Oct 18 is a minimum goal that assumes Dems are playing a losing hand.
But, so far at least, that doesn’t seem to be the case. So why stop?
That Trump is threatening to DOGE the government again is exactly why they need to keep fighting.
This part is key.
Elected leaders need to identify priorities and lead the party towards them.
There are lots of artificial constraints that the party has been operating under (like the U.S. Constitution, lol), which need to be set aside to enable a new politics grand enough to meet the moment.
Elected leaders need to identify priorities and lead the party towards them.
There are lots of artificial constraints that the party has been operating under (like the U.S. Constitution, lol), which need to be set aside to enable a new politics grand enough to meet the moment.
October 7, 2025 at 12:06 AM
This part is key.
Elected leaders need to identify priorities and lead the party towards them.
There are lots of artificial constraints that the party has been operating under (like the U.S. Constitution, lol), which need to be set aside to enable a new politics grand enough to meet the moment.
Elected leaders need to identify priorities and lead the party towards them.
There are lots of artificial constraints that the party has been operating under (like the U.S. Constitution, lol), which need to be set aside to enable a new politics grand enough to meet the moment.
This seems broadly right to me.
We need to give the party more flexibility so we can create large majorities.
We need to give the party more flexibility so we can create large majorities.
October 6, 2025 at 11:54 PM
This seems broadly right to me.
We need to give the party more flexibility so we can create large majorities.
We need to give the party more flexibility so we can create large majorities.
This is a good idea from Mr Kristol.
October 6, 2025 at 6:32 PM
This is a good idea from Mr Kristol.
I find it difficult to argue with the notion that institutional settings aren’t appropriate in many cases, or that we went too far with the reforms of the 1970’s and eventual cuts by Reagan.
October 6, 2025 at 3:34 AM
I find it difficult to argue with the notion that institutional settings aren’t appropriate in many cases, or that we went too far with the reforms of the 1970’s and eventual cuts by Reagan.
Once he declares an emergency (as he has) he can replace officers with anyone he wants.
That said, there are plenty of officers who are hard core MAGA and happy do do whatever Trump wants.
That said, there are plenty of officers who are hard core MAGA and happy do do whatever Trump wants.
October 6, 2025 at 1:34 AM
Once he declares an emergency (as he has) he can replace officers with anyone he wants.
That said, there are plenty of officers who are hard core MAGA and happy do do whatever Trump wants.
That said, there are plenty of officers who are hard core MAGA and happy do do whatever Trump wants.
