You pay YouTube TV $72.99/month. For channels picked by Google. On Google's servers. With Google's ads.
You pay Hulu + Live TV $82.99/month. On Hulu's servers. With Hulu's ads. With Hulu's interface.
You pay Sling TV $40/month. For a stripped-down package. Still their servers. Still their rules.
Someone built a free collection of publicly available IPTV channels from every country on earth. No subscription. No account. No app required.
It's called iptv-org/iptv. 125,685 stars on GitHub.
You copy one URL. You paste it into VLC. You press Open. Every channel loads instantly. That is the entire setup.
Here's what it does:
→ A single master playlist at one URL containing every available channel in the repository.
→ Channels organized by country. By language. By category. Sports. News. Kids. Movies.
→ Works with any video player that supports live streaming. VLC, Kodi, Plex, IPTV Smarters, and dozens more.
→ Channels from every continent. Hundreds of countries. Dozens of languages.
YouTube TV: $72.99/month. $875.88/year.
Hulu + Live TV: $82.99/month. $995.88/year.
Sling TV Orange + Blue: $65/month. $780/year.
DirecTV Stream: $79.99/month. $959.88/year.
iptv-org/iptv: $0. Unlimited channels. Every country. Every language. Forever.
100% Open Source.
Github repo link: https://t.co/TjMEQkOVB2
@tyromper@grok Low intelligence. Schools indoctrinate and votes get imported and paid for with tax dollars… the 200k each year that leave are the ones who have figured it out, the ones who stay don’t know any better
@mehdirhasan@mcuban The bottom 50% in America are immensely better off than the bottom 50% anywhere else in the world… the answer to lifting standards of living further cannot include nerfing incentives to build
The first problem is that some builders actually want to build great things, not defraud the public.
I’m convinced this is why Trump ran for president. He knew the scam. He hated the scam because it created red tape.
And if you’re running the scam, you have to discredit, sue, and even arrest the builders who want to build, especially the ones who hate the regulations that make the fraud possible. That’s why Trump became the focus of the hate, and why developers like Witkoff, Kushner, and Wynn became Trump supporters.
A bigger problem is labor.
It’s not just taxpayers who lose. Low labor spending means workers lose their jobs. Won’t they complain?
Nope. This is why Democrats pour so much money into unions. The union bosses get fat checks and lots of perks, and perks are easy to hide as expenses.
But they can’t completely screw over the rank and file, so they hire PR firms and consultants too, to rationalize the decline to their own base. And the base isn’t too worried, because most have second jobs and collect standby fees to do nothing.
The few guys who do show up are paid a lot extra per hour based on esoteric union rules.
Of course there’s little room for new members but the media has pushed the “you must go to college” narrative so hard most don’t want their kids joining the union anyway.
Next is suppliers who complain about having to close factories because material doesn’t get shipped.
Let the unions take care of the labor in the same way and outsource all but token manufacturing to a subcontractor in China. Building nothing is profitable for manufacturing executives too.
Some need extra incentive and that’s the job of McKinsey to help them figure out how to supercharge executive pay while doing nothing.
The next problem is legality.
This isn’t much of a problem if you write the laws to protect yourself and control the funding of investigations.
You really think “defund the police” was about racism? You really think the entire FBI pivoting to January 6th was about Trump? No. Those were distractions from the biggest fraud of all time: the infrastructure act and the “Inflation Reduction Act.”
But even with all that, one massive problem remains. Taxes.
Al Capone didn’t go to Alcatraz for murder or racketeering. He went for tax evasion.
Again: the fraud hides in the flow of money. In transactions. Most of your taxes aren’t on fixed assets. You pay them when you transfer something: property, stocks, cash, your labor. The system is built that way in part to discourage transactions. So you need entities that don’t pay taxes to wash the money. Enter the non-profit NGO.
Money can flow within an NGO, as we saw with the SPLC scandal, tax free. Better still, they can organize events, marches, and friendly MSM coverage to “support” Democratic politicians.
Construction managers get the usual tax deductions and dodge capital gains. But they can also donate appreciated stock to a foundation or donor-advised fund, take a large deduction, skip the capital gains bill, and direct how the money gets spent for years. The money can’t legally buy personal vacations or yachts, but family members can sit on the boards, hire the staff, fund the favored causes, sponsor the research, and shape the public debate. The tax savings are real. So is the influence.
And why own a yacht anyway when the NGO has lists of corrupt people who own yachts you can use?
And remember how NYPD detectives weren’t allowed to investigate arson, because that was FDNY’s job? The FBI and other agencies are discouraged by lawmakers, executives, and their own unions from investigating non-profits, because “they’re a public good.”
And if someone really presses for an investigation, friendly detectives can be hand-picked for a “special task force” that does nothing at all.
It’s the same bones as the “Jewish Lightning” scam. Except now it isn’t tenements in the Bronx that are burning. It’s the entire nation.
BBC Sport has a live World Cup knockout bracket updating after every match.
Some clever soul has made it so it automatically works out the 495 possible combinations of third-placed teams.
Right now?
Germany v Brazil
England v Portugal
Scotland v Japan
https://t.co/RnvFefXFtQ
@BowTiedYanqui Beautiful property, great setting, pool was heated and fantastic… only bummer was how expensive the room service and restaurants were. Much better to eat off property.
@DmvHammer@JamesTate121 It’s funds that were already appropriated for training time. No new expenses were incurred. If there was no event, those jets still would been scrambled for training time.
In short: No new taxpayer appropriation was needed, but the activity does consume resources already budgeted for military readiness and demonstrations. Critics argue opportunity costs exist; supporters view it as routine patriotic outreach with built-in training value. Exact figures for this specific flyover aren’t publicly broken out beyond these ranges