Eric F. Jacobs

𝕏 is where everyone can feel they’re part of the conversation and it doesn’t even matter if no one is listening.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@Aerych_ @hriengaalkn 🎯

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@MQCcape @PTBwrites Indeed

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@RonDeSantis It takes time to manufacture enough votes

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

Sadly that’s accurate. I’ve heard many gay Republicans say that coming out as conservative in the gay community was more traumatic than coming out to their own parents as gay. 🤯😕

But it’s not surprising when ~60% of republicans polled say they would end gay marriage, and ~10-20% would recriminalize homosexual behavior.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

Andrew Sullivan wrote about this last year, and more eloquently than I can (link below).

I know many gay and lesbian couples who lead normal lives, are family-oriented, and are good parents. They practice their faith and strive to live good lives and be good people.

As far as problematic LGB behavior goes, I am reminded of this: “you put a spoonful of wine in a barrel full of sewage, you get sewage. If you put a spoonful of sewage in a barrel full of wine, you get... sewage.” -Schopenhauer.

The “liberationists” have long been a counterproductive, but highly visible part of the gay rights cause. They’re not helping.

https://t.co/9VCqK6OOkt

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

Legally Congress could cut benefits to millionaires who paid FICA their whole lives, just like it could impose a 100% income tax above a certain threshold. But both would be deeply wrong and political suicide.

Social Security taxes are mandatory payroll taxes on your earnings, sold to Americans as contributions to a national pension system with benefits based on what you paid in. Suddenly deciding we are not paying millionaires after collecting tens or hundreds of thousands per person is functionally a retroactive confiscation. This is taking the money under one set of rules, then changing the rules after the fact.

It is exactly the same logic as saying we are going to tax people at 100% earnings above some arbitrary threshold that feels high to a majority of voters. Both the SS tax and a hypothetical 100% income tax are confiscatory and apply to people’s income. The government took that money throughout their working lives with an explicit promise of earnings-based benefits in return. Reneging on it now is no different from collecting the taxes and then declaring we no longer wish to keep the promise.

It is not welfare and not a mere entitlement. It is an earned-benefit program. The social contract and basic fairness demand honoring that for people already retired, even if the Supreme Court says there is no enforceable contract.

That Social Security has been a really lousy social contract, with atrocious returns, and that it was enacted without contractual guarantees does not change the fact that it was and remains the only universal and obligatory American pension system.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@grok @Politics_Reply @GreenPlusAnE @grok explain how statutory requirements differentiate Social Security from usual income redistributions

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@grok @Politics_Reply @GreenPlusAnE @grok Explain how asking leading questions of an AI is just fishing for the answer you want and isn’t genuine debate

[Sam Korus @skorusARK]

“We’ve done the analysis, reusable rockets aren’t economic.”

SpaceX makes reusable rockets economic.

“We’ve done the analysis satellite internet isn’t economic. The antenna alone is tens of thousands of dollars. The cost to manage a constellation that size, the radiation, the space hardened solar cost…”

Satellite internet appears to be a very good business with antennas in the $100 range.

“We’ve done the analysis, orbital data centers aren’t economic. The radiators, launch costs, the radiation, the solar…”

You are here.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@Tweet137188103 @DogsHammer @cremieuxrecueil You need more gay republican friends 🤔😜

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@Politics_Reply @GreenPlusAnE Incorrect again. While Social Security involves taxes and redistribution, legally and structurally it functions as a dedicated social insurance program with earned benefits tied to contributions; it’s not a generic tax funding discretionary transfer payments.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@Tweet137188103 @DogsHammer @cremieuxrecueil Normal LGBs questioned the addition of T(rans)+ in the 90s, after all gender dysphoria is nothing like same-sex attraction.

But the Leftists in charge of the loudest and most well funded advocacy groups told them to shut up and get behind it.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@Politics_Reply @GreenPlusAnE You completely missed the point. You’re treating Social Security as a simple income redistribution tax, which is incorrect.

Social Security, despite its numerous flaws, is intended to be a national pension system, with payouts based on pay-ins.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@PTBwrites “Normal” gays blame the TQ+ cohort.

TQ+ hitched their wagon to the successful LGB train and were eagerly embraced by Leftist advocacy groups desperate for a new cause to keep the donation money train rolling.

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@AlexanderPayton @AlexanderPayton what am I missing?

[Eric F. Jacobs @ericfjacobs]

@AlexanderPayton They omitted the sample sizes, margins of error, or survey dates on the infographic. According to the link, the MoE is +/-3.6 for RV and +/-4.4 for LV, but the graphic presents the numbers as precise when in fact the close margins are well inside error bounds.