BruceVC

Sure but when I say inefficiencies that can be linked to corruption. SA has a corruption problem that is exacerbated by lack of governance and oversight which is not necessarily corruption in itself So for example every single year most of the municipalities , with the exception of the Western Cape where I live and run by the DA, fails the auditor-generals report ....and the same municipalities fail it year after year. Its not necessarily because of corruption but things like wasteful expenditure or irregular expenditure. And yet its identified but the situation doesnt change So from your link Musk says things like "He claims 99 federal agencies is "more than enough" - there are currently over 400 agencies and sub-agencies. "? How would he really know 100 agencies is enough but this an objective around efficiency And then he says " The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) will "dismantle government bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure federal agencies" So he seems to think he can streamline the Federal government and make it more effective. I think his objective is well-meaning but I dont think its based on proper facts or an understanding of the mammoth task in front of him?

Apparently there is lots of inefficiencies in the US Federal system and Musk is going to address that But the word " inefficiencies " is subjective for me living in SA because of our overall subpar public sector delivery Im sure most South Africans would be more than happy with any first world public sector "inefficiencies " around contractors We just want thing to work as expected, I have even heard some South Africans say things in desperation like " we would accept the corruption around tenders awarded and contractors as long as things work" But we end up with the worst of both, corruption and failure to deliver on many public sector services

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/4985802-trump-cabinet-nominees-second-term/ Here is summary of Trumps nominations so far. I like some of them and I dont know others but its more or less predictable based on Trumps policies he committed The most interesting nomination is "Trump announced that Musk, a billionaire backer, and Ramaswamy, a former primary rival who endorsed Trump earlier this year, would lead an effort to slash government spending and regulations. They are expected to conclude their work by July 4, 2026, just a few months before the midterm elections. Trump said the effort would partner with the Office of Management and Budget, but would provide guidance from “outside of Government.” Musk in particular has extensive financial holdings with government contractors that could complicate an official government job." Musk is a genius and very successful businessmen but it remains to be seen how effective he will be around this public sector role?

There is definitely a debate to be had about BEE, AA and DEI and cases where white people have been discriminated against. I posted the story in the UK about the air-force and the discriminatory hiring practices that were exposed Its complicated and wont apply in all cases but I can believe there would be cases of real discrimination against white people in the US In South Africa its ongoing about something different because we have lots of allegations of BEE not creating opportunities for the majority of black people but rather enriching the same small black minority because they get the public sector tenders. So it doesnt help address inequality or distribute or create wealth if the same black companies get all the business. But its not as simple as that because we have limited companies who can respond to tenders and meet the criteria, thats just the reality So it doesnt seem fair to say the same black companies get most of the public sector tenders if they are the only ones who can respond, its not there fault more companies dont exist? And you need to be BEE compliant to get tenders

Why dont you make yourself a cheese fondue and drink some nice wine , that always cheers me up

It will be interesting to see what she complains about at the UN? I can guess but I would rather wait and see Also people dont always last there time under Trump, he can be very capricious like that and prone to mood swings and people lose favor quickly

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c079m9mxx1no Trump has confirmed 2 appointments Tom Homan will be border tsar and he previously worked for ICE and I imagine he will be very effective at addressing the border crisis and deporting illegal migrants. And Trump needs to be effective on this policy considering the promises he made to US citizens " In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said Homan would be "in charge of our Nation’s Borders (“The Border Czar”), including, but not limited to, the Southern Border, the Northern Border, all Maritime, and Aviation Security". He continued: "Likewise, Tom Homan will be in charge of all Deportation of Illegal Aliens back to their Country of Origin. Congratulations to Tom. I have no doubt he will do a fantastic, and long awaited for, job." One of Trump's major campaign pledges was to deport immigrants who are in the US illegally. " And then Elise Stefanik will be UN ambassador, she did a good job at identifying and calling out the double standards at various US universities after 7 October where Jewish students were subjected to rampant anti-Semitism and intimidation. And these were the same universities who for years had been telling us the importance of Universities being "safe spaces " where students mustn't be bullied or intimidated Im not sure how good she will be as the UN ambassador but lets see? And I really like Susie Wiles as WH chief of staff, she is highly respected and apparently told Trump she would only take the job if " the clown car can’t come into the White House at will " and Trump agreed https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-susie-wiles-election-administration-b2644282.html

Also its not hard to imagine how NATO would implement article 5 Lets say Ukraine was part of NATO before the invasion in 2022, a NATO military missions would be initiated to fight within the borders of Ukraine It doesnt mean they would need to attack Russia itself but they could and would engage with the Russian military forces involved in the invasion And that same strategy can be adopted if any member country is attacked, NATO already has a military presence and resources in the EU and a track record of military missions I dont see why its so difficult to imagine them supporting article 5 and it also doesn't mean nukes would be the outcome especially if a county like Russia invades any NATO member like it did with Ukraine?

I decided to play Stasis, its an adventure South African game and it seems to be the only South African game that has become "famous " I have never been committed to sci-fi adventure games and this was no different, I became very lazy and ended using walkthroughs to complete about 80% of it...so it was like an interactive novel Its not fair to rate it with a famous " BruceVC score " because using walkthroughs defeats the point of understanding the game and objectively rating it But now Im playing The Vanishing of Ethan Carter another adventure game and Im really enjoying it I put effort into understanding the puzzle mechanics and Im enjoying the overall narrative and how you progress

Yes this is definitely an exaggeration, Iran is a threat to US interests in the ME but its not a grave threat

You cant really, I actively engage in Romance arcs when they applicable and its very easy to avoid Romance with any NPC that you dont want to initiate Romance Thats one of Bioware criticisms that is typically exaggerated, Romance is not forced down on you. You can easily avoid it And that applies to DA2, I had Anders in my party and when he started flirting with me I just shut it down and it ended But I did pursue Romance with the liberated, beautiful and amazing Isabella

Current Iranian leadership has a history of antagonism towards the US since its revolution, its been going on for decades They have been killing US soldiers in various ME regions directly like in Iraq 2003 where Quds special forces got involved in that war or through Iranian proxies long before Trump ever thought he would become a politician And then they dislike the US even more because of its support of Israel and thats because of the historical tension between Iran and Israel where the US is often referred to as the "Great Satan " and Iran doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist Trump is not the reason for the tension between the US and Iran, it goes back much longer than that and is influenced by several other reasons

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/08/politics/doj-charges-three-iranian-plot-to-kill-donald-trump/index.html An update on the Iranian plot to assassinate Trump and yet some still ask the question " in what way is Iran an enemy to the US "

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine NATO has become more relevant since the end of the Cold War and its membership has grown You cant really judge NATO on " would Article 5 be invoked " because it hasnt been tested? But we can judge NATO on developments like its funding models because that shows necessary commitment from its members and this was always lacking until Russia's warmongering became undeniable after the invasion https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2024/07/nato-defence-spending-a-bumper-year/#:~:text=Overall%2C total NATO spending increased,growth of 9% in 2023. " NATO defence expenditure has surged in 2024, with 19 of the 32 Alliance members implementing double-digit growth in real terms to their military budgets. Increases by European members continue to be driven by the threat posed by Russia’s war in Ukraine, in addition to the ambition set in the Wales Summit Declaration in 2014 to spend at least 2% of gross domestic product on defence within a decade. Progress towards the 2% benchmark has been notable, particularly since 2022. According to the latest military-expenditure data released by NATO, 23 members will reach or exceed the 2% of GDP target this year, compared to seven in 2022 and just three in 2014. The data also finds that aggregate spending for the Alliance now exceeds the target level as a proportion of total GDP. The level of growth implemented by countries to reach the target level in 2024 was significant. Overall, total NATO spending increased by 11% in 2024, compared to 3% in 2023. Growth was even stronger among NATO’s European members, who increased their combined military spending by 19% in real terms in 2024, following not-insignificant growth of 9% in 2023. This is remarkable given that the annual average for 2014–22 was just 3%, and is a stark indication of the deterioration in the strategic environment in Europe. This growth spurt, however, will likely skew underlying trends and, as ever, raises concerns that when funding increases too rapidly, it may not be spent effectively. " Out of all the 3 N lies to justify the invasion of Ukraine the one that has become the biggest Russian failure is the NATO one NATO has not only grown its membership and is more on the Russian border than ever before but its own internal funding and relevance has increased NATO was never ever going to invade Russia anyway, nukes prevent that and you wont get consensus for this type of military campaign Article 5 is a big part of countries joining NATO nowadays ironically because of the Russian invasion but hopefully that is never tested

Well I question what it really means to " declare war on Cartels " and how effective that will be considering historical precedent But this is classic Trump grandstanding Its different to things he can implement and be measured on like China tariffs and greater border security

Why is that? What is the main issue you have with an online gaming connection to play any game?

Great story Melkie, I really enjoyed it The eternal and industrious entrepreneurial gamer spirit never dies !!!!

I dont think its that unexpected , ask most countries who were part of the USSR who they want to align with and the majority of them will want to join the EU\West as opposed to the Russian block And Putin knows this which is why he cant ever give people the choice in a free and fair way. He can only ensure Russian alignment by invading countries or supporting a pro-Russian autocracy But he cant risk giving citizens a choice

I watched this movie last night, its really good and it raises the expected moral conundrum you see in the trailer in much more detail and context Its one those movies where you really think " what would I do " considering the reality Let me know when you have or anyone else has watched it and this is what I would have done

This is a good policy but I doubt how effective it will be? You cant win the war on drugs when there is a market for those drugs, that has been confirmed time after time But he can strengthen the border more and focus on Fentanyl And several things around what he is suggesting has already been tried like "Order the Department of Defense to make appropriate use of special forces, cyber warfare, and other covert and overt actions to inflict maximum damage on cartel leadership, infrastructure, and operations"

But we have had 4 years of Trump already and he didnt destroy the US It will be interesting to list the things he did in those 4 years and ask which policies he implemented were really bad because its several years later and its easier to assess? IMO he definitely said some questionable things and he didnt handle the virus as well as he could of but despite all this he still won the popular vote now so for me his presidency wasnt that terrible for Americans?

You make some good points here Can I make an suggestion, you must try to not take what Trump says literally on certain points. Its the path to real and unnecessary anxiety Yes he will deport people illegally in the country and he will strengthen the border but mass deportations is not uncommon. South Africa is doing the exact same thing with people in the country illegally https://witness.co.za/news/2024/10/23/r52-million-spent-deporting-nearly-20-000-illegal-foreigners/ It is a strategy to address illegal migrants, I just dont know how effective it is in our case because we have porous borders and very inefficient border control so anyone deported back to Zimbabwe or Mozambique will literally be back in the country 2 days later We have a much worse problem relative to the USA around illegal migration because the ANC only started doing something about it and acknowledging it 2-3 years ago. And they only started then because of the pushback and resource shortages from black people in townships and illegal migration just exacerbates our limited public sector resources But I have listened to several interviews from Trump spokespeople and they said the military would only be used to deal with border issues and mass deportations and not citizens or anyone in the country legally The point Im making is Trump said a lot of things before the election but like last time what is he really going to implement and what will be the focus? And Im sure the border and migration will gets lots of attention

Its worth playing, the War Room has some nice mechanics and there is always something to do I enjoyed the party interaction but I didnt Romance anyone. I tried with Josephine but she is a NPC and it didnt work out anyway despite how I followed the Romance dialogue options

Well yes, this makes sense on most levels I have raised this before several times. The biggest problem I have with the way Bioware represents women in there latest games is its actually insulting to suggest most female gamers dont want to play a female character who looks like a women or is attractive Its only in gaming where suddenly an attractive women is seen as " objectifying " women But in all other aspects of society you find liberated and attractive women who thrive and are appreciated and that includes news anchors, movies, celebrities, advertising, adult movies, modelling and fashion shows and a myriad of other examples But for several Western development studios the idea of an attractive women is somehow bad Chainmail bikini armour forever !!!!!

Biden would have been a much worse candidate, he was not mentally capable of ever being the US president for another 4 years Trump won for the obvious reasons, the real and perceived failures on issues that most Americans attribute to the Dems because its the incumbent party Thats just the way the politics and elections work in any Democracy where you have free and fair elections and sometimes the incumbent party gets blamed unfairly and sometimes its legitimate In this election the inflation issue was not primarily the Dems fault because the whole world went through inflation after the virus lockdowns ended and this takes time to stabilize But the illegal migration and border failures falls on the Dems and thats unavoidable even if solution is not easy to fix, I am interested to see what Trump will do and how much impact it will make And then one thing that is clear is that the Dems fearmongering strategy against Trump is ineffective and unconvincing. Most Americans just dont believe the whole " how can anyone vote for Trump, he will destroy America " Because the counter argument to that is " things seemed better under Trump, Im not convinced he will destroy the US "