With almost 400 million users on Twitter it should come as no surprise that it is actually a pretty good measure for understanding societal interactions and implications as a whole.
This Sunday before the election I'd submit before you the following, you have collectively failed in what I am to understand, is your duty to Christ your Lord and Savior which is to spread his message.
You have failed not because the rest of us are godless, heathens, devil worshippers or whatever fuck all hateful diatribe you happen to label the 'others' with. No. You have failed because you don't embody the qualities of His teachings.
You are a vast collection of the most wretched misanthropic hominids to falsely bear his name.
You neither walk-the-walk or talk-the-talk in your daily activities. In all honesty, there is zero benefit to be derived being a member of your club, spiritual or otherwise
It's really not that difficult to understand why savvy advertisers want nothing to do with this platform.
To preserve their brand they require neutrality and to reach a wide audience.
No marketing person wants their product popping up in the context of toxic content.
Ask yourselves, how did other far right platforms fare in regards to ad revenue?
Exactly.
By modeling after those mistakes for *whatever* reasons the new chief twit invites all those points of failure here.
If you were launching a product or were already an established
brand would you like your brand to be recognized or otherwise associated with:
antisemitism / holocaust denier
discrimination (racial religious etc)
violent / hateful speech
anti-democratic practices
conspiracy theories
misinformation / lies
Having contributed to Social Security my entire adult life I'm a little more than majorly pissed off that Republicans just want to keep that money, but that's just me.
Let's talk privatization then.
A big part of the benefit of Social Security is that it is very efficient. The administrative costs of the retirement portion of the program are just 0.4 percent of what is paid out in benefits each year.
By comparison, the costs of even relatively well-run privatized systems, like those in Chile or the United Kingdom, are 10-15 percent of benefits.