Justin Striebel

@jstriebel

I still like yellow numbers. I now like blue skies.

1,276 Following1,020 Followers6,021 Posts

Is this your profile?Claim it and jstriebel.dirty.social is yours.Claim profile

VAR might have struggled to say this was clear and obvious, but it was absolutely a dive by Mbappe. The silly thing is that he could have not dove and it would have been a foul no doubt. But since he did, that should not have been a PK.

Left front angle of Mbappe going to ground before contact.

Alternative angle of Mbappe going to ground before contact.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 6

FIFA Disciplinary Code Article 9(2 & 3).

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 6

Before people get mad about FIFA saying Belgium has no grounds to appeal, that's just straight from the rule book. They do not have standing.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 6

So all I'll respond to is the part where you say it's made up. Because it isn't. It's a published protocol from IFAB, who also is the body that publishes the laws of the game. www.theifab.com/laws/latest/...

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 6

This is the most famous goal in World Cup history, scored by one of the best players in soccer history, on route to winning the World Cup... 40 years ago. And today we're talking like there's no coming back from the perception of impropriety that lead to the FAIR outcome. I mean. LOL.

A photo of the infamous Diego Maradona "Hand of God" goal scored in the 1986 World Cup.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 5

Wow. We really are gonna do the dumbest takes over this, huh? Actually, the US benefits a lot from Balogun being able to play. (Off the hook is a garbage term that implies the red card had any legitimacy in the first place. It did not.)

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 5

They had to change the subhead on this bc they previously stated this was a first, until they realized Fida had already done it for Cristiano Ronaldo like a month ago lol. Not quite the scandal they want it to be.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 2

You’re just plain incorrect here. This was a reckless challenge at worst. It was in disregard to the danger of his action. But there is no excessive force here.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 2

… have they tho …

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jun 21

Glad the Cardinals won, but I'm still fuming. Replay clearly showed a runner not touching the plate and they just let it stand. “Very close” is not the same as unclear. His fingers don’t touch the plate. This isn’t a hard call.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jun 5

I know I got LeBron and Harden past their primes, but this team would be neat. www.82-0.com/share?id=2aI...

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· May 3

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Apr 15

Screenshot of a headline and subhead from a 2024 news article in which JD Vance admits he’s full of sh*t.

“JD Vance admits he is willing to ‘create stories’ to get media attention

Republican vice-presidential candidate defends spreading false, racist claims demonizing Haitian immigrants”

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 24

3/3

Lambert Favors Federal Tax to Aid in Recovery

Continued from First Page.

Dictions Brough about by the excess profit tax effective from 1917 to 1921. At that time, he states labor had a purchasing power and industry a profit. This tax, he considers, was a large factor in promoting the years of prosperity that followed that period.

“The excess profit tax,” he writes, “developed an unexpected but beneficial reaction. Excessive profits were diverted from taxation for greater employment, higher wages, executive salaries and national advertising. Both business and taxation gained in the end. The unprecedented increase in advertising bore fruit. Volume sales, prices and profits jumped by leaps and bounds.”

Following in the wake of the excess profit tax, related Maj. Lambert, big business grew bigger under a wise policy of volume sales and small unit profits. It was a move to bring about a more rapid turnover of merchandise on the retail shelves to the general prosperity of producer, retailer, labor and consumer.

Artificial Levels Attained.

“Then having created volume consumption,” states Lambert, “producers attempted to ‘hog the market.’ By means of consolidations, restricted production, protective tariffs and less man labor, all prices and profits were gradually increased to artificial levels. When prices were increased beyond the purchasing power of the outside consumer, consumption and demand decreased, to break down finally the volume markets of both industry and labor.”

Maj. Lambert refers to technocracy—by which he means the trend towards ever-increasing mechanization of industry—as “all boat, no water.” A compact, scientific vessel of production, with no sea of demand on which to launch itself.

“If industry,” he declares, “should discard all man power and resort exclusively to machinery, there would not be enough customers to buy 20 per cent of their production. And yet that is just the course organized industry has followed. They aimed at greater profits for themselves, but hit each others’ consumers.

“Labor at work has a purchasing power. Idle labor becomes a public charge on business and the government. If a machine displaces ten units or 1,000,000 units of man power, that machine must create sufficient revenue to balance the equivalent loss of purchasing power and consumption.”

Industry Will Have to Pay.

He maintains that in the end industry will have to pay in increasing amounts for the upkeep of government, to provide public hospitals, eleemosynary institutions, pensions, education and other requisites of a normal living to those jobless deprived of work by machinery—that is, unless conditions are changed. The situation resolves itself to this: The sooner labor is put back to work, the better for all concerned.

Technocracy, he asserts, has wound the clock of production too tight; it must now unwind.

The machine, he claims, is not blameworthy because it has caused overproduction, but because it has displaced so many men and caused a resultant lack of buying power.

“There is no such thing as overproduction of an essential commodity, at least in a not too literal sense,” declares Lambert. “High prices or poor quality create the surplus. And as a general rule high prices do not originate at the source of production. It is the cost of distribution from the farmer to the city consumer.

Paradoxical Situation

“That explains in part the paradoxical situation of low price wheat on the farm and 10-cent bread in the cities—likewise low price and a surplus of cotton and the present need of 5,000,000 cotton blankets. The consumer is no better off than the farmer.”

Yet, he says, farm leadership continues to support legislation sustaining prevailing factors of distribution.

Maj. Lambert also discusses organized minority groups which he declares to be fostering legislation to further their own interests to the detriment of the public, thus contributing to the general unrest. And he treats briefly of farm relief and the railroad-automobile competition, likewise factors to contend with in evolving a plan that might look towards siding depressed conditions of the country.

He declares during the course of his exposition:

“There is no immediate relief from the present high tax rates not to any appreciable extent.

“Nowhere in the halls of Congress or in state capitols has the voice of political leadership been heard in favor of the general consumer.

“Wall street has an overproduction of financiers and the Federal Government too many political economists.

“To complete liquidation, price levels will drop to those of 1913. I think they are almost there now.”

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 24

2/3

System of Taxation.

If a corporation should use 100 per cent machinery, to state a hypothetical case, and makes a net profit of 50 or 100 per cent, that corporation should be taxed the entire profit, less 6 per cent return on the working capital. “In a reciprocal sense,” he states, “this company is a parasite on the general market of commodities.”

He explained what happens when a concern discharges employes. A hat manufactory, for instance, trims its operating costs by firing ten employes. One result is that a shoe manufactory virtually loses ten customers, as do the clothing companies, automobile concerns, ad infinitum. Doing less business then, the shoe company shaves down its pay roster, with the result that the hat company, which originally started the movement, loses a good handful of potential customers. So the condition continues in an interlocking diminution of sales and with resultant damage to the various industries.

The company starts out by saving its own financial skin at the expense of other industries, but like a boomerang, its actions results in striking at its own sales sheet.

Continuing explanation of the general plan of exemptions, Maj. Lambert states a corporation using 75 per cent labor or even 50 per cent, such as the building industries, would be free of the tax. These concerns support labor and indirectly the general markets.

“An average example of exemption,” he writes, “would be a corporation with a 30 per cent item of labor costs in relation to gross business volume. Many corporations, however, have by one method or another reduced the item of labor to 10 per cent or even less.”

The obvious objection that arises to the profit tax plan at present is—Where are the profits? What company is making a profit large enough to be taxed?

Despite the current habit of passing dividends, according to Lambert, there are corporations today enjoying considerable profit statements. “And even if there is only one or two,” he points out, “that would start the rehiring ball rolling. It is good news now to read that 150 men are put back to work, whereas ten years ago the hiring of 50,000 would have caused hardly a ripple of comment.”

It is merely the general suggestion for a profit tax he is urging, he says. Details could be worked out for an equitable scale of exemptions when, and if, the plan would be taken up in Congress.

Maj. Lambert, who has been studying industrial conditions for more than a year in preparation for the pamphlet, declares there are approximately 72,000,000 persons in the United States either jobless or dependent on a minimum income ranging from $1000 to $1800 a year.

Piles of Reference.

He has statistics to prove this and other observations he makes—piles of reference clipped from newspapers, business and technical magazines and reports. In reaching the 72,000,000 computation he quotes a table of population classification set up by Prof. Nystrom of the National Bureau of Economic Research. This table shows the following data:

Incompetents, tramps, public charges, etc., number between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000; persons on the poverty line, 8,000,000; those with bare subsistence, 12,000,000; those with minimum health and sufficiency, 20,000,000; those with minimum comfort, 30,000,000; those fairly comfortable, 20,000,000; the moderately well-to-do, 15,000,000; the well-to-do, 10,000,000; those with liberal income, 2,000,000.

The first five classifications aggregate the 72,000,000 figure used by Lambert. Thus approximately half the population are in an economic position where only necessities count.

“This group,” he asserts, “has just so many dollars to spend, no more and no less. Consequently, their purchasing power rises or falls in accordance with retail prices.

“And these folk, a certain percentage of whom are from the ranks of organized labor, collectively represent a majority consumption of all essential commodities. In the general market of non-essentials and manufactured products, their purchasing power is extremely susceptible to high or low prices.

Consumer Big Factor New.

“The difference is clearly evident—low prices increase their volume of purchases to cause a subsequent increase in production and employment; high prices decrease consumption with a subsequent decrease in production and employment.

“From now on the outside consumer rather than big profits is going to be the factor in commercial competition.”

He described his proposal for a profit tax as arising from the con

Continued on Page 2B, Column 3.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 24

1/3

St. Louis Globe-Democrat
St. Louis, Sunday Morning, February 5, 1933

Maj. Lambert Favors Drastic Increase in Taxation on Profits

Retired Pharmacal Company Head Presents in Pamphlet New Method of Controlling Business to Bring About Prosperity

HAS NEW PLAN
—Alan MacEwan.
ALBERT BOND LAMBERT.

A drastic plan to restore economic balance and resuscitate the lost purchasing power of the nation is proposed in a thought-stimulating pamphlet just published by Maj. Albert Bond Lambert, retired president of the Lambert Pharmacal Company. Paradoxically and in the face of almost universal demand for wholesale tax slashes, he advocates a new tax—a federal profit tax designed to put labor back to work and which, under his plan, could run as high as 100 per cent.

Tax machinery! Make it pay the upkeep and contribute to the welfare of the hundreds of thousands it has shunted from their jobs! Or curb it sufficiently to permit labor to come in off the streets and regain a place in factory and plant! Let Uncle Sam set down a Congress-gaitered foot on the industrial rage for shearing pay rolls! Thus, believes Lambert, can be rebuilt again the spending power of the masses.

Such is the general burden of his brochure.

Maj. Lambert, in addition to a prominence in aviation circles that has made his name known from one edge of the country to the other, was for twenty-six years president of the pharmacal concern. Since his retirement in 1925 he has continued a shrewd observer of practical economics and industrialism.

He has printed 4000 copies of the little book which he will place in the mails today for distribution to persons throughout the city. He explains he has not sent them to capitalists and business leaders, for he knows what their ideas are own the present economic situation. The pamphlet, which he has called “In Reply to Technocracy, a 100 Per Cent Profit Tax,” will go into the homes of clerk and merchant, minister and day laborer, butcher, baker and electrician.

These folk,” remarks Lambert, “possess the power to make needed changes, and I believe they are awakening to the fact. I have asked them for comment on the ideas expressed and urged them to get in touch with their Senators and Congressmen in Washington should my suggestion stir indorsement.

The 100 per cent tax he proposes would provide exemptions for companies or plants employing a large percentage of labor. Only those concerns deriving large profits through major usage of machinery and a minimum of employes would bear the brunt of the stringent tax.

“The suggestion I offer herewith,” writes Maj. Lambert, “is for Congress to impose 100 per cent profit tax on all business where net profits are above 6 per cent of the working capital.

“The distinctive feature of this tax is to be a scale of exemptions based on the number of persons employed in operation and production. In other words, a corporation that employs a large percentage of labor would be exempt. A corporation that employs slightly less than an average volume of labor would pay a small tax. Whereas a corporation with large profits and small labor costs will be proportionately taxed or must readjust its machinery to include a larger percentage of labor.

The scale of exemptions should be just sufficient to favor the use of man-power. It must be so scaled that industry will be encouraged or even forced, under reasonable terms, to take up the present slack of unemployed, but not beyond reasonable proportions or at artificial labor prices.

Inducements to Supply Jobs.

“The purpose of this tax is to place the initiative on each business to provide, wherever possible, a job for labor. No doubt it will increase the cost of production and slightly affect retail prices, but not beyond that of former periods when both business and labor were prosperous.”

The plan covers broadly the idea of taxing machinery, not for the tax as a means of government revenue but to stabilize all labor conditions. He believes industry can, without much sacrifice, meet the situation.

His idea, Maj. Lambert avers, does not mean the junking of machinery on a wholesale scale; nor does it single out any specific type of machine to attack.

“It does not call arbitrarily for the dismantling of machinery, nor will it affect its general fundamental use,” he writes. “Here and there is a thousand and more stores, factories and business houses, numerous machine accessories can be cut or readjusted, such as automatic carriers, stamping, label and packing machines, self-selling or slot machines, automatic this and automatic that—trimming of the fringes, so to speak.

“As each person returns to work just that much purchasing power is regained to support the markets. When labor by a gradual process regains normal employment, the profit tax and exemption scales can be minimized according to conditions or even repealed if no longer necessary.”

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 23

Generally I find celebrating being blocked to be some form of cope, but in this case, NGL, it makes me laugh.

“@mattdoyle.bsky.social has blocked you”

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 15

NCAA basketball coaching staffs that are still wearing suit and ties instead of matching warmups aren’t presenting a “here for business” image, they’re just… lame.

Freedom of Speech painting by Norman Rockwell

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Feb 8

Here's the three possession sequence of calls/no-calls in the middle of OT that handed Michigan State a game they shouldn't have won tonight. Absolutely brutal officiating towards Illinois.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Dec 15

I’m not saying there is any agenda here, but this is such odd location framing of this crime. The push alert similarly mentioned California and the 49ers, not even the team the player played for. The crime occurred in Nashville, TN. But the notification and headline only connect to California.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Nov 23

App settings (within your settings app not within the sports app):

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Oct 14

I don’t understand why the play clock isn’t reviewable in football. (And spare me that repeated statement about giving a beat after the clock gifs zero. I imagine it’s true, but it’s also dumb.)

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Sep 13

x.com/elonmusk/sta...

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Sep 12

CNN is still rolling with the bad ATF bulletin reporting. They've softened their language to "cultural issues" but they've actually made the leap to "phrases." I mean what the hell is this @cnn.com?

Screen grab of CNN article summarizing what's supposedly known about the Charlie Kirk shooting. Words are "The shooting: Audio captured near the podium where Kirk was speaking suggests he was hit with a single supersonic gunshot, according to an audio forensics expert. Meantime, sources say phrases related to cultural issues were scrawled on a rifle and ammunition recovered by authorities." The last sentence is highlighted to call out what is now debated if not fully debunked reporting.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Aug 26

Letter of a law is a BS argument here anyways. Letter of the law doesn’t support this being a foul even if there was contact and even if the ref had called it on the field. It was none of these three things.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Aug 4

marylandmatters.org/2024/01/31/c...

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Aug 2

This app haha. This is my favorite block ever. All because I said Kamala Harris deserves some grace for prioritizing her mental health after the awful election season she went through.

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· Jul 2

In fact, forget the Congress.

Still frame from the animated show Futurama with the character Bender from the scene in which he recites the line "Yeah, well, I'm gonna go build my own theme park. With blackjack and hookers. In fact, forget the park."

Justin Striebel@jstriebel· May 25

What am I missing?