TBH I’m kind of glad the new CEO is a “Product” guy and not a “Numbers” guy (Tim was the COO for years under Steve, John was the SVP of HW engineering). If there’s any reason to be cool with this transition it’s that, Apple got real greedy under Tim.

This maps change was probably started under Tim; John just got the keys yesterday. I don’t not blame him for it as the new guy in charge but I’m still curious to see how he impacts Apple over the next few months to years (Apple generally has an ~18-ish month pipeline so it’s gonna take a little time to see the full scope).

If he fails us though, pls make John Turdus a thing 🤡

Missed chance to coin “John Turdus” OP

Check them out again around Black Friday! If you’re ok paying annually they usually have some pretty deep discounts then.

My first year was on a Black Friday discount and I got their high end plan (usually $45 a month) for $225 for the whole year (made it cheaper than the low end plan)! It renews at like $450 but that’s still so much cheaper than other carriers in the long term.

Sounds like you have multiple lines on TMo. Visible is a 1 line per account setup but with inner circle you can pay them all together and get another $5 a month off.

The ATT reps at Costco HATE me because they can’t offer a good enough deal to switch 😂

I’ve been very happy with Visible. They’re owned by Verizon and in the long term, it’s the best value I’ve been able to find. They have a 2 week free trial period and frequently have awesome deals during Black Friday and in the Spring. Even without a discount though, plans start at $25/month with a plan that is probably enough for most people. Their highest tier (of 3) is $45.

Moved off T-Mobile for Visible after getting sick of their constant data breaches and haven’t been this happy with a cell carrier since Jump On-Demand was a thing.

The only real catches are:

• Support is basically a chatbot and social media teams. However, human support reps do exist if you’re insistent enough, and I’ve only needed them maybe once in the past 3 years or so

• Plans are for smartphones (and smartwatches with an existing smartphone line) only. No tablets or other devices.

You’re right, this is why what we really need to do is tax the rich and make them pay their fair share while also moving off a car-dependent infrastructure.

Oh agreed I’m all for making the rich pay their fair share. If they did maybe this wouldn’t even be a topic worth much discussion

Kinda figured it was something like that, in both cases lol

Personally more of a fan of a pay per mile system but this is actually a really cool sounding alternative.

Trump :(

It’s the US we get taxed on everything, it just isn’t always obvious.

Oregon has a pay-per-mile system that would be more fair, IMO. Not sure if they still have it but at one point, they let you choose between having a tracker or just self-reporting your mileage. Makes sense if you use the road less, you should pay less and vice-versa.

Flat tax just spreads the estimated additional wear and cost around to everyone, like going out to dinner with a group and splitting the bill evenly vs just paying for what you ordered. I’d rather just pay for what I ordered.

I own an EV and already pay an extra road tax for having an EV to my state, on top of more for tires, more for insurance, more for repairs, and more for public fast charging thanks to the government’s failure to build up charging infrastructure at a decent pace. Why should I pay another tax to the federal government?

Do they speaketh of a trinity? Can they gaze at the sun with their wandering eye?

Racism is too large a problem in the US to be constrained to a single political party unfortunately, and at no point have I defended the Democrats so I don’t think what I’ve been saying and your feelings of it conflict.

The party platforms switched (largely) due to the platform FDR ran on. Prior to that point, Democrat platform was centered around smaller, limited government.

https://factmyth.com/factoids/democrats-and-republicans-switched-platforms/

However it wasn’t as clean as a single point in time you could point at and say “here, and these policies”. There was no handing over of anything and it wasn’t a cut and dry swap.

This is why a lot of Republicans will argue that the swap didn’t happen, because it was more like an evolution of stances over time with a few big notable shakeups and not really possible to pinpoint.

The source I provided above goes into some key points in history that serve as examples of how the parties switched platforms if that helps to understand it better.

One thing is clear though: the party of Lincoln and today’s Republican Party are similar only in name. For the most part, the same is true for Democrats. They are no longer the same party they were in the time period the other user continues to mention.

I would love to provide a source but going off this particular user’s history it’s likely they will not accept it in good faith. If it is actually being requested I would be happy to oblige.

You’re right, it would be nice if we could refrain from juvenile namecalling or whatabouting.

You are correct there is nuance involving when party platforms switched, but not that the platforms switched.

Continue being in denial all you want but the parties absolutely switched platforms. Everything else in your comment was a deflection from you being wrong about this point.

It’s not a myth, that’s just something Republicans say to blame their past doings on the Democrats of today lol.

The Democrats used to be the party of small government, and Republicans the party of big government. Refusing to believe history doesn’t make you any less wrong.

Also you keep misspelling “gerrymandering”. If you can’t even learn to spell it how do you expect people to believe you understand it?

This was before the parties switched platforms, so it is not the slam dunk you think it is.