/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>26652484
Based

>>24844806
>so new he doesn't know he's replying to me

>>24560172
Nah your girl is over in chinkland turning tricks outside the pachinko parlors

>TQQQ

>>23610300
>dubs and red ID
we're gonna make it bro

>>23440787
Buy the dip, we can't warn you enough.

>>23420315
I can't believe you replied.
>(literally 78 days ago)
- Irrelevant, it shows McConnel's position between CARES and today, that's what matters.
- You should have noticed I said
"every McConnel presser includes all of this but here's a nice catchall source for all of it"
which is true and obviates your concern, you're objecting to nothing here.
>NOWHERE in the entire video do any of the senate republicans say they would support a high price tag stimulus bill, a bill exceeding $2 trillion.
Just say the thing you're trying to prove:
"Therefore, McConnell believes in a $2t hard spending cap, and his constituents also demand a $2t hard spending cap."
- Not the argument we were having, retard.
- Not supported by the absence of one arbitrary dollar target. Just think about it for a second. I am arguing from McConnell's explicit policy objectives and GOP voter sentiment, which are two good pieces of evidence that he might support a bill at any arbitrary cost if it had smart policy objectives.
You're arguing that he never explicitly signaled support for one price target. Your demand JUST ONE source is contrived and foolish because, between
me: "McConnel's interests lean in a certain direction" and
you: "McConnel never supported this exact target number, in the context of using it to pay for stupid policies"
the former is a stronger argument with stronger evidence. You're a fool to disagree.
>Again, talking in circles here,
I accurately summarized McConnell's position and voter sentiment, while proving that your assessment is inaccurate.
That's not going in circles, that's making progress in resolving the argument. You're just unwilling to update your opinion based on stronger arguments.
You repeated your inaccurate assessment for no reason for the tenth time after getting taught by someone with superior knowledge and attention span.
That IS going in circles, but you're the only one doing it.

>>23340643
He's still got it

>>23151555

>>22373916
All four sides of your chin must be 90 degree angles. Just don't forget us when you get rich.

>>16220856
>>16221074
>t. kike

>>15104289
>>15104268
these

it's all "this is fud" til it actually happens, and when it does happen it will be like cryptopia- you won't see it coming even tho everyone knew it was due

>>13139916
desu you missed the huge run up...you can still buy so we form the head and shoulders and sell the top of this 15 minute candle but it is risky. After this candle it will crash back down

Im in LINK
and also TRTL. Feels good man

>>11859606
3600 is still fucking low, op

so many longs will be eaten

then they'll tank it to 2000 to eat those longs

then they'll tank it to 1000 to eat those longs

then they'll tank it to 500 to eat those longs

theeeeeeen we pump, 10 year bear

>>11113671
>As for you, nobody likes your stupid act.
Jesus, you're just going after them tonight aren't you kek? But in all seriousness you can't cast a death spell on someone who already is afflicted by it. Kneepad doesn't have a mean bone in her body, so I give it slack for that.
>>11113711
The fucking mad man is going to do it. Fucking based trump!!

I still can't believe normies bought it over 3x it's actual value

I was laughing so hard reading their Telegram I was crying

>>9893801
I'm gonna need a green day, good prediction.

Based Dean's heading for mid-teens™

>>8301637
You mean this guy?

>>8301081

>>7379615
I love this man