Surprisingly, when you drop not enough food basically at random on a whole population of starving people, they start “stealing” it from each other. And the ones who are best at violence tend to be the ones who wind up with it. Who knew.

(Not that I’m saying the NYT isn’t lying here. I haven’t even read the details really, but I’m sure they are making up some kind of bullshit. I’m just saying that, even if there is some kind of “theft” or hoarding of food going on, that is 100% what anyone with a brain would expect to happen from the way Israel is controlling humanitarian aid at this point.)

I don’t get the

Oooooohhh

That’s a good joke.

I also didn’t get the reason for the ban, but I get that now too. That’s a good joke.

Just in time 💀💀💀💀💀💀😢💀💀🤕💀💀💀

That’s a really great point! I’ll try to be less patronizing in the future, that’s helpful feedback, thank you.

we will not vote our way out of this mess

Probably true at this point. However, we did vote our way into it. This was precisely the kind of thing people pointed out as a pretty good reason not to let Trump come to power, even if (whatever much more minor complaint about Kamala Harris.) And then people on Lemmy yelled at them and called them stupid.

you’re using up to 10% ($1000/$10000) every month then you’ll appear to be highly leveraged on credit

Hi! I have some helpful feedback for you. Just to help you understand how credit cards work.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/06/14/how-to-build-850-perfect-credit-score-fico/84163305007/

10% is what this person refers to as the “sweet spot.” They recommend keeping it under 30% or you may get actual significant penalties. Lower than 10% may be useful if you want to get every last point of credit score, but there’s no universe where 10% would be “highly leveraged.”

I definitely value your input as to my interrogations, and total unreasonableness. Please understand, my goal is purely to share knowledge about credit cards specifically, and definitely not to accuse this poster at this point of anything in particular.

“lmao u doin it wrong and lyin” troll

Rude

As silly as it seems, even 10% utilization can bring your score down. I have seen it recommended to stay under 8% or around 6%.

This is objectively wrong, for this situation.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/06/14/how-to-build-850-perfect-credit-score-fico/84163305007/

“And I think the best practice here is to try to keep your utilization under 30%,” O’Leary said. “But I think the sweet spot is 10%, or even less than 10%.”

If you have a $300 balance on a $10k limit card, you will not lose anything off your rating. If you have a $1000 balance on a $10k limit card, you might lose a tiny amount compared to having a 0 balance, but it won’t be all that much (some fraction of the 3/10 of your credit rating that is determined by how much credit you’re using), and you will as you noted regain it as soon as you pay that balance. Having a 10% credit utilization will in no universe take you from “qualified for a $10k credit line” to “dogshit.”

Second - If you have or can get a credit card with a decent cashback or rewards program, you might be able to put some of those larger transactions on the credit card and come out ahead even with the fees. This is going to be highly sensitive to the specifics though and the card usually needs to have no annual fees or it eliminates the possibility.

This part is accurate. Basically anything that doesn’t charge you a separate fee for using a CC, you should use a card for, because most cards will kick back part of their processing fees to you in the form of rewards.

Amit Segal, another outspoken defender of Israel, cited the same report in raising a similar alarm, warning that a famine “would see Israel lose even its most strident supporters.”

Doubt

Please follow the spirit of our instance rules in future.

Oh, absolutely. Yes, sir.

I don’t actually think people should get banned for being tankies. My provisional reaction to the actual moderation question is PTB, just because they’re either censoring you for your viewpoint (which they shouldn’t do), or else using that as insulting shorthand for some other more malicious behavior (which they also shouldn’t do, although it’s more understandable.) I don’t care enough about that question to look into it all that much, though. You apparently casually lying about being from the US and also having some unknown-to-me kinds of views which brought you into conflict with those specific people is a lot more interesting to me than whatever moderation event, honestly.

I really have no reason to try to prove anything to you

You don’t owe me any explanation or proof of anything, no. I’m mostly raising an issue for the awareness of anyone else reading, and giving you a chance to explain and defend your comments and claims if you want to.

It’s more relevant to the conversation here of “are they worth banning because of bad faith behavior” than it is to the conversation about credit scores.

I don’t think the moderator’s dismissive language “known tankie” is really accurate or productive, even if the mod has some kind of awareness of a history of bad-faith behavior. But, it’s relevant to the ban if they have a history of bad-faith behavior, and whether they’re lying about stuff has relevance to that.

I realize I’m stepping into and increasing a whole tribal “tankie vs liberal” civil war here by weighing in, which maybe isn’t a good idea. Banning someone simply because they’re a tankie, I don’t agree with, if that’s the real reason, it’s PTB. If that is some kind of careless insulting code for some other behavior which is the actual issue, I think they should say that. But the issue from my comment is just the first thing that jumped out at me looking at the YPTB question, and I thought it definitely might be relevant and so I decided to speak on it.

My score didn’t drop a tiny amount, it dropped by about 100 points

So from “excellent” to “still excellent, but lower.” Mine was high 700s at one point and I couldn’t get above a $4k limit and I tried.

My living expenses are low and some of the larger transactions are paid direct from my bank account to avoid credit card fees.

You’re not from the US, are you.

Which is fine, but why would you be pretending to be? Why not just say “I’m not really familiar with what normal living expenses and credit limits are in the US, or how the credit and banking system works there, because I don’t live there and never have, which is why I never made any kind of post about how my US credit score is right now”?

Semi-expecting for me to get some kind of heat from the moderators for this line of inquiry BTW lol. That is honestly the only explanation I can see for it, though. Maybe I am wrong and there is some other explanation.

Why would I lie about this?

You tell me.

You put everything on the credit card, but also, your usual expenses on the credit card are <$300 per month?

Also why’d you say the score was now dogshit, if all you meant was that it dropped by the tiny amount that the situation you described would cause it to drop (even if your general expenses had dropped to usually <$300 per month for some reason)?

It might seem kind of unrelated, but I have to say I’m a little bit leaning towards whatever judgement it was that led to someone banning you, just because of this situation. It seems kind of plausible that you might have other weird posting behaviors if you tend to casually lie about random things… but also I can’t really say I understand it fully since I don’t understand the reason for the lie really. It’s just such a weird thing to lie about. It is objectively impossible for what you said to be true, though…

I have no input about the original ban, but I was curious and glanced at your profile:

I have only one credit card which I charge everything to (credit limit is more than enough at over $10k) and which I pay off in full each month and have no absolutely debt, therefore my credit score is absolute dogshit.

That’s not how credit scores and credit cards work. You would already need an excellent credit score to get the $10k limit in the first place, but on top of that having a credit line open in the specific form of a consumer credit card, charging a lot to it, and then consistently paying it off, is pretty much the textbook way to get an excellent credit score. I can’t off the top of my head think of a way to get a better one. The reason is that that specific way winds up funneling a pretty significant amount of money to the credit card companies every month, but exposing them to very little risk, and that’s precisely their favorite thing in the world.

Why are you lying about this unimportant point? Like I say, it’s not related to anything about the original ban, but it’s a weird thing to lie about.

Look at the goalposts go lol

“He’s not a REAL supporter of Palestine”

“Why does it not count, all these things he did to materially support Palestine, from inside the US government where it can actually make a real material difference in a way that almost no one else on earth is able to do when they care about Palestine?”

“Because he doesn’t want to see Israel destroyed. That means it doesn’t count.”

Fuck outta here

“Everyone who doesn’t want the destruction of Israel = Zionist”

Well, by that definition, sure, he’s a Zionist. On the other hand, if you say that a Zionist is a ham sandwich, he’s not a Zionist. The point is: Words are fun, we can redefine them to make all kinds of great arguments.

Ceasefire?

They already broke the code, just turn off the food and let them starve to the last person.

What the fuck? I know why the politicians are doing it, creating an illusion of normalcy is part of their job. I just don’t get why anyone is reporting on it within that framing without lightning striking them while they’re in the middle of talking.

I’m pretty sure there was a genuine amendment defunding the Iron Dome that MTG introduced. I could be wrong but I saw that in sources that don’t just make stuff up.

She proposed a big handful of amendments; maybe Iron Dome is in ICP and they just don’t like to publicize it very much, or maybe it was in one of the other amendments.

Yeah. I guess that’s a good way to look at it, is they’re spending so much energy on it because the progressive momentum is steadily building. I just wish their energy would quit translating into success.