Hi guy
I know that at a basic psychological level, a person generally must be some form of antisocial/sociopath/psychopath,narcissist to become a billionaire.
Does becoming a billionaire simply allow for/encourage more extreme levels of behaviors or are they predisposed?
Is it a rite of passage/secret handshake, or is it just “perks” of being evil?
The simplest solution seems to be to detach CEO’s from their internal organs.
A conspiracy of global elites? Pffft.
That’s crazytalk.
It’s not like Peter Thiel ,one time president and current member of the BILDERBERG steering committee , and a bunch of other dudes who worked at PayPal are solely responsible for the trajectory of technology…
Or like some forum on economics somewhere in the world would coordinate economics, and make some crazy plan with a super unbelievably literal name like agenda 2030 with the dude at the head saying “you’ll own nothing and you will be happy”
I mean… Crazy. Right.
The rich should have already been filleted and cooked.
In america they are know as the new apostolic Reformation or the Seven Mountain Mandate/7M/7MM. And yes, their goal is Armageddon. And yes, mike Johnson, ted Cruz and father, boebert, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and dozens of other Republicans and influential and powerful people on the far right spectrum are members of or closely associated with these groups. And many of the outsider types have been quietly given government positions.
Of special note is Paula White, trump’s “spiritual advisor”
Followers believe that by fulfilling the Seven Mountain Mandate, they can establish the kingdom of God on earth and bring about the end times.
Peter thiel is everything wrong with the world.
He is a plague, a cancer, a curse.
He is in the Epstein files.
He likely had his gay lover killed for revealing he was gay.
Peter thiel is the enemy of humanity.
Peter thiel is an antichrist
Understanding the intent of the question *and understanding why it could be interpreted differently *\and understanding why is it is a poorly phrased question:
There are 3 sentences.
I want to wash my car. No location or method is specified. No ‘at the car wash’. No ‘take my car to the car wash’ . No ‘take the car through the car wash’
A car wash is this far. Is this an option? A question. A suggestion. A demand?
Should I walk or drive? To do what? Wash the car? Ok. If the car wash is an option, that seems very far. But walking there seems silly. Since no method or location for washing the car was mentioned I could wash my own car.
Do you see how this works?
Yes, you can infer what was implied, but the question itself offers no certainty that what you infer is what it is actually implying.
Understanding the intent of the question *and understanding why it could be interpreted differently *\and understanding why is it is a poorly phrased question are not related to autism. (In my case)
I want to wash my car. No location or method is specified. No ‘at the car wash’. No ‘take my car to the car wash’ . No ‘take the car through the car wash’
A car wash is this far. Is this an option? A question. A suggestion. A demand?
Should I walk or drive? To do what? Wash the car? Ok. If the car wash is an option, that seems very far. But walking there seems silly. Since no method or location for washing the car was mentioned I could wash my own car.
Do you see how this works?
Yes, you can infer what was implied, but the question itself offers no certainty that what you infer is what it is actually implying.
Without reading the article, the title just says wash the car.
I could go for a walk and wash my car in my driveway.
Reading the article… That is exactly the question asked. It is a very ambiguous question.
*I do understand the intent of the question, but it could be phrased more clearly.
The irony