Jason Lively retweeted
It’s not about the zoo tickets, it’s that at some point I looked up from my paycheck and realized OH, cool, I’m apparently funding the welfare state, Big Pharma, foreign countries, “Learing Centers,” government programs I’ve never heard of, Planned Fucking Parenthood, and seventeen layers of bureaucracy whose primary function appears to be emailing each other PDFs; meanwhile, I pay taxes when I earn money, taxes when I spend money, taxes to employ people, taxes on property I ALREADY OWN, taxes go up every year anyway, the school district discovers another $75,000,000 it absolutely cannot survive without, and if I so much as raise my hand and ask whether maybe, possibly, perhaps somebody could spend slightly less money, I am informed that I hate teachers, children, puppies and probably literacy, and NOW after financing civilization itself I’m also supposed to smile and subsidize someone’s trip to see the giraffes.
Know what I mean?
Jason Lively retweeted
"Homebuilders say they can't find workers amid the ICE crackdowns."
Logically unpack that sentence:
"Can't find workers" does not mean zero people exist who can swing a hammer. It means they cannot fill crews at the wages, hours, conditions, and hiring practices they were using yesterday.
"Amid the ICE crackdowns" identifies which workers disappeared from the pool: the ones ICE is targeting. That is an admission that a meaningful share of their prior labor supply was unauthorized.
The unspoken third clause is therefore: the legal/American labor market is not filling those slots at the old price. If it were, the complaint would be different ("we raised pay 30% and still came up short") instead of "enforcement happened and now we have no crews."
The statement is not evidence that Americans refuse construction work. It is evidence that the industry’s previous equilibrium relied on a lower-cost, higher-risk labor source that enforcement has now disrupted.
#BREAKING: Homebuilders say they can't find workers amid the ICE crackdowns.
Jason Lively retweeted
The Tax System Explained in Beer
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
- The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
- The fifth would pay $1.
- The sixth would pay $3.
- The seventh would pay $7.
- The eighth would pay $12.
- The ninth would pay $18.
- The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3... (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7... (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12... (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18... (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59... (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.
But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he received ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
WAR is the worst advanced metric know to man and 5s are not premier defensive teams players (and that’s why WAR is dumb)
Jason Lively retweeted
some thoughts on Lawrence to Cincy...
<buckle up>
Dexter Lawrence is a 28-year old stud
he spent most of his career playing vs elite interior OLs of the Eagles & Cowboys
he's been double-teamed at the highest rate in the NFL
he's now playing in the AFC North
Ravens lost their C
Steelers might start a 42-yr old QB
Browns have Deshaun or Shedeur
Lawrence should FEAST
the Giants were TERRIBLE when he wasn't on the field
last year, even in a "down" year for Lawrence:
Giants defense with...
Dexter Lawrence OFF the field:
#32 YPA (8.4)
#31 sack rate (4.1%)
#27 EPA/pass (+0.13)
#26 pass success (47%)
#23 pressure rate (32%)
Dexter Lawrence ON the field:
#7 pass success (40%)
#8 YPA (6.6)
#9 sack rate (7.7%)
#10 EPA/pass (+0.09)
#22 pressure rate (33%)
that was a "down" year for Dexter
the team was top-10 vs the pass when he was out there
bottom-10 when he wasn't
want a larger sample?
last 3 years:
Dexter Lawrence OFF the field:
#32 YPA (7.7)
#31 pressure rate (29%)
#31 pass success (48%)
#30 EPA/pass (+0.14)
#30 sack rate (5.5%)
Dexter Lawrence ON the field:
#8 pass success (42%)
#8 sack rate (7.4%)
#10 EPA/pass (+0.02)
#13 YPA (7.0)
#15 pressure rate (36%)
and again, the context is VITAL:
he was obviously the #1 best player on the Giants defense
every team knew it
they double teamed him at the #1 highest rate and he STILL made this big of a difference
and that was despite playing some of the NFL's top offensive lines in the NFC East as it relates tot he Eagles and Cowboys for YEARS
oh, and then there's this pretty ridiculous nugget:
Jason Lively retweeted
Reports indicating Hendrickson chose Baltimore because he felt it was the best culture fit to be on a team that also backs out of deals they agreed to.
Jason Lively retweeted
It’s hard to put into words this moment.
A sell-out Schott the loudest I’ve ever heard it.
All 18,000 just saw history with one pull up three.
Jason Lively retweeted
Look out 2026 Olympics RT @usahockey: USA Hockey's 8 & under membership has reached 100,000 for the first time ever.





















