It's too cowardly to actually be a threat. He didn't say he was going to shoot her, he just says that someone somewhere should do it *wink wink*.
It's basically just internet trolling. He doesn't intend to do anything, but he would celebrate if some random wackjob actually did it. I can't count the number of times people have said that certain politicians should be shot, Obama and Trump included, it's always just angry hyperbole from stupid people who should know better.
Even if we agree with the above notion, that it's "just trolling", the man in question is still a police officer. That's the crux; because of the function he has, he isn't allowed to be as careless as a civilian. '
Hey, I don't disagree. Just a few posts above I said I was happy that he was fired over it. Clearly he doesn't have good judgment, and he made his police department look really bad (damaging relations between the police department and the community is grounds for dismissal in many departments).
That's the thing, I totally agree with you both on moral grounds but we are dealing with a profoundly stupid country and all of the squad are in solidly democratic areas. Them shitting on more moderate democrats doesn't really help. Because are the more moderate democrats moderate because they are more moderate or because that's what they were elected to be. Republicans tend to be willing to form ranks come hell or high water, dems are much more willing to in-fight about issues. Which personally I see as a strength of the democratic party, but it doesn't look good to see that aired on the news and the republicans will grab a hold of anything they see like that and use it.
You could convince me otherwise by finding stats about why democrats won the house in 2018. Was it because people believed in their ideas, or was it because people were having second thoughts about trump. If they won because people believed in their ideas then AOC and the squad can push harder for their changes and they will be accepted, but if it was mainly because people were losing faith in trump then... well, the democrats need to take things slower.
Also, keep in mind we lost the supreme court under trump, not as hard as we could have but if he manages to get another term then there will be at least one more left/moderate judge retiring/dying and he will get another pick, which will do enormous damage. Like, moderates and the left will be pretty fucked. We didn't get legalized gay marriage because of direct legislation, we got it because the IRS allowed married same sex couples to file taxes together and the court ruled that it had to be recognized for tax purposes in all states, but it was a 5-4 ruling.
I totally understand and agree with you guys but right now winning is all that maters. The rest we can figure out but we need to win.
First of all, who started this 'The Squad' thing? Sounds to me like some right-wing moniker thrown on them to make them sound scary. I keep suddenly seeing it.
Second, the 'moderate Democrats' are the ones shitting on them! Pelosi shat on them during her interview, 60 minutes I believe. That was the line for me.
Now more than ever we need to not be afraid to say what needs to be said. We need to not care what stupid people think, we need to start doing what is right, even when those stupid people tell us we're wrong. Its why I don't put up with stupid people's bullshit like I used to, and now I cut through so much more bullshit faster. Playing a game with cheaters and idiots only makes you lose.
They came up with " squad" themselves:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/23/squad-congress-how-aoc-omar-tlaib-and-pressley-got-name/1804557001/
However, shortly after they started being mocked as if they were cheerleaders to take them less seriously, as that is what cheerleaders are called.
I was wondering where that came from. I kind of agree with the people making fun of them, "squad" sounds really juvenile, like a high school clique. I think the the stupid squad goals hashtag ruined the word "squad" for me and I can't take it seriously anymore, which is unfortunate.
Which rings hollow when Conservatives were okay with people holding up signs calling for Obama's lynching or showing up at his appearences with AR-15's.
*Some* conservatives, perhaps. Personally I would condemn the latter and possibly the former. I defend people's right to express themselves - even when using strong, emotive language that strays into the realm of violent metaphor at times. Conversely, influencing the political process with the use or threat of violence is pretty much the dictionary definition of terrorism, so there's no way I can support any outright threat, call to violence, or brandishing of weapons at a politician.
Trump, while running for President of the United States on national television, stated that the Megyn Kelly had "Blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever", Then a random comedian makes a fake head showing what that would actually look like on Trump in reference to Trump's own words and somehow what Kathy did was worse? [...] a comedian making a prop to show the meaning of a guys own words is somehow comparable why?
If this is a true and accurate summary of what happened then it's literally the first time I'm hearing it.
EDIT: In addition, it isn't about supporting one political belief over another, it is about requirements to do the job. If you have beliefs that prevent you from viewing and treating people equally, you cannot protect and serve them equally. That means you are unfit for the job, as viewing and treating people equally should be a requirement to protect and serve that community equally.
I disagree, I think everybody has biases whether it's something as trivial as a sports team rivalry or feeling a fondness for people from your hometown, or as extreme as a political/religious/gender/ethnic grudge. There is no way we can steamroll people's biases out of them, and I would argue nor is it desirable or even necessary. Somebody acting in a professional role should be trusted to put their personal leanings to one side when performing their job (and if they can't, fire them). A great example would be the riot police who keep anticapitalist protestors safe from counter-protestors, while simultaneously being verbally abused by them, spat at, and called pigs and fascists.
It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Props to you for being willing to acknowledge when you have received bad information though. Most rarely do and instead try to convince themselves that "alternative facts" are actually a thing.
I have received bad info before as well, none of us are immune from it, we just have to look further before accepting everything we see and hear these days due to our current "post truth" existence. Disinformation is everywhere, so sources are more important than ever.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
The republicans are the main reason we have such a hard time taking care of our own citizens. Whats actually interesting is that getting rid of illegals actually hurts everyone and will probably result in fewer jobs not more. Because when you have more people, you have more people to sell things to, that need people to do things for them, and that means more money flowing around.
Also, we did the whole get rid of all the mexicans thing before, including getting rid of american citizens because they were brown. Yet we still have brown people.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
No, Trump never did that, and in fact his entire Empire is built on specifically NOT putting his money where his mouth is. If this is how you define your standards, then I question them.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
Democrats, or people in reality don't understand the "spoilered part", because as pointed out above, the spoilered part was in fact false information and AOC was actually right. " the whole AOC clown car" was provably a lie, as shown already in this thread and corrected. As shown above, the ICE agent was avoiding the part of the law that AOC was addressing and was the one who was inaccurate. People seeking asylum do not need to do so at the port of entry according the the law itself, nor are they violating their ability to claim asylum in the US as falsely stated by the former ICE director. It is not a crime for them to cross into the US wherever they can and turn themselves in as they have been doing under US asylum law.
Trump, regardless of him thinking he can do whatever he wants, does not actually write the laws, nor can he change them at will by executive order, congress does. Trump and his administration have been in violation of numerous court orders on his handling of immigration and is actually breaking the law.
The US has no problem "being able" to take care of our own citizens, it is just Republicans prevent the US from doing so. There is more than enough to go around in the US, the US is no where near over populated, in fact many towns are shrinking to the point of not existing instead. Like Warren stated in the debates last night, Even a 2% wealth tax on those with over $50 million in wealth (approximately 75,000 families) assets would be enough to generate over $2.75 trillion to use on programs to "take care of the people" alone. Repuplicans instead take from the poor and middle class to allow the already wealthy to take even more. It is false that Republicans do not support welfare in the US, they actually do, they just only support welfare for the wealthy and allow them to pay less percentages of taxes than the middle class do. Republicans have no issue giving out dole to the corporations and wealthy businessmen who back them, just not to those who will die without help. Instead of your taxes being used to help you and others like you when life becomes difficult, they use your tax money to pay Corporations CEO Salaries instead.
I live in one of the highest immigration regions in North America and I am not seeing that the US actually has an "immigration problem". The only problem I really see the US having right now is they have people who don't know their head from their arse running things so they are making things worse, not better. It is a bit ironic though that a person whose tribe has been on this continent longer than most anyone is telling you that North America does not have an immigration problem and thinks you do not have a right to close off access to this land to others. Who gets to decide you get to come in and lock the door behind you? These families coming in have just as much right to be here as you do, as your ancestors did and should be welcomed just the same. They are just as important as you are, as I am, and there is no reason this should ever be viewed as an " us vs them" issue in the first place and I have no idea why you are attempting to make it out to be one.
You should also take a closer look at who you are saying has "never had to experience the effect of these things" because many of our representatives came from meager means themselves. Of course there are plenty of "come from wealth" people in congress, however, those that are the most outspoken on protecting immigrants are often the ones who come from immigrant families and have struggled themselves.
Immigrants and children of immigrants make up at least 13% of congress:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/24/in-116th-congress-at-least-13-of-lawmakers-are-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants/
It is also interesting how many Republicans who want to stop others from having the same rights that were afforded to their own families. Under's Trump's own Proposals, his wife would lose her citizenship since she violated her visa and lied on her citizenship
application. Mitch McConnell's wife arrived in the US on a cargo ship from China and did not speak any English. What is Trump doing to people in their same circumstance today? Are they getting the same chance afforded to their own families or are they just greedy hypocrites that are trying to hoard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for themselves while denying it to everyone else?
They have no problem giving out opportunity to their own spouses and themselves, but will torture and punish other families for doing the same. It is sadist tbh and against everything the US is supposed to stand for in the first place. It isn't just "his mouth" that is the problem here, it is his policies.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
Democrats, or people in reality don't understand the "spoilered part", because as pointed out above, the spoilered part was in fact false information and AOC was actually right. " the whole AOC clown car" was provably a lie, as shown already in this thread and corrected. As shown above, the ICE agent was avoiding the part of the law that AOC was addressing and was the one who was inaccurate. People seeking asylum do not need to do so at the port of entry according the the law itself, nor are they violating their ability to claim asylum in the US as falsely stated by the former ICE director. It is not a crime for them to cross into the US wherever they can and turn themselves in as they have been doing under US asylum law.
Trump, regardless of him thinking he can do whatever he wants, does not actually write the laws, nor can he change them at will by executive order, congress does. Trump and his administration have been in violation of numerous court orders on his handling of immigration and is actually breaking the law.
The US has no problem "being able" to take care of our own citizens, it is just Republicans prevent the US from doing so. There is more than enough to go around in the US, the US is no where near over populated, in fact many towns are shrinking to the point of not existing instead. Like Warren stated in the debates last night, Even a 2% wealth tax on those with over $50 million in wealth (approximately 75,000 families) assets would be enough to generate over $2.75 trillion to use on programs to "take care of the people" alone. Repuplicans instead take from the poor and middle class to allow the already wealthy to take even more. It is false that Republicans do not support welfare in the US, they actually do, they just only support welfare for the wealthy and allow them to pay less percentages of taxes than the middle class do. Republicans have no issue giving out dole to the corporations and wealthy businessmen who back them, just not to those who will die without help. Instead of your taxes being used to help you and others like you when life becomes difficult, they use your tax money to pay Corporations CEO Salaries instead.
I live in one of the highest immigration regions in North America and I am not seeing that the US actually has an "immigration problem". The only problem I really see the US having right now is they have people who don't know their head from their arse running things so they are making things worse, not better. It is a bit ironic though that a person whose tribe has been on this continent longer than most anyone is telling you that North America does not have an immigration problem and thinks you do not have a right to close off access to this land to others. Who gets to decide you get to come in and lock the door behind you? These families coming in have just as much right to be here as you do, as your ancestors did and should be welcomed just the same. They are just as important as you are, as I am, and there is no reason this should ever be viewed as an " us vs them" issue in the first place and I have no idea why you are attempting to make it out to be one.
You should also take a closer look at who you are saying has "never had to experience the effect of these things" because many of our representatives came from meager means themselves. Of course there are plenty of "come from wealth" people in congress, however, those that are the most outspoken on protecting immigrants are often the ones who come from immigrant families and have struggled themselves.
Immigrants and children of immigrants make up at least 13% of congress:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/24/in-116th-congress-at-least-13-of-lawmakers-are-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants/
It is also interesting how many Republicans who want to stop others from having the same rights that were afforded to their own families. Under's Trump's own Proposals, his wife would lose her citizenship since she violated her visa and lied on her citizenship
application. Mitch McConnell's wife arrived in the US on a cargo ship from China and did not speak any English. What is Trump doing to people in their same circumstance today? Are they getting the same chance afforded to their own families or are they just greedy hypocrites that are trying to hoard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for themselves while denying it to everyone else?
They have no problem giving out opportunity to their own spouses and themselves, but will torture and punish other families for doing the same. It is sadist tbh and against everything the US is supposed to stand for in the first place. It isn't just "his mouth" that is the problem here, it is his policies.
The problem isn't as simple as assigning all blame to evil Republican forces. It also has to do with the fact that Democratic leadership can be deceiving [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/12/27/liberal-priorities-all-seem-to-hurt-the-poor/#24d402742db5] and has routinely failed [https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/how-decades-of-democratic-rule-ruined-some-of-our-finest-cities/] the voters who've put faith in them.
Democratic leadership is more about empowering the government than it is empowering the people. The reason republicans have typically given tax breaks to the wealthy is simply because they are typically the ones driving economic growth. If high tax rates on the rich were the answer, it would have worked by now. Scott Hodge, the Tax Foundation?s president, says: ?Almost no other industrialized nation depends on the rich to pay the bills more than the United States.? [https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/sorry-mr-obama-heres-why-raising-taxes-the-rich-wont-work]
Another problem is even if it did work, it wouldn't be as simple as "tax the rich, reap the benefits". The tax system as it stands is already a nightmare, and the additional wealth taxes proposed would likely be an impractical, logistical and legal dumpster fire [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/your-money/tax-wealthy.html] that would essentially require scrapping the whole system and starting from scratch. Our government doesn't have the best track record of getting much of anything done from scratch the last few generations.
Democratic socialism sounds nice, but what the latest proponents in the running fail to mention is that strong capitalistic foundations [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/amp/] were first required to get to that point without disasterous consequences. They are also still experimenting. When people like Sanders and AOC point to Nordic countries as leading examples of what works, they probably didn't mention how much of the burden the lower and middle class still bear [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/07/26/native-of-scandinavia-debunks-myth-of-nordic-countries-as-socialist/amp/], along with - surprise - lenient corporate taxation like here in the U.S.
The truth is no perfect system exists, and sadly human nature is largely to blame. The same goes for immigration policy. When colonists first set up shop in North America, they were escaping what they saw to be injustice and aimed to build a better system from scratch. They certainly made colossal mistakes along the way (Native American exploitation, oppression, even extermination in some cases, African slavery, etc.) but what's done is done. Learn from it and adapt to improve, but it would be irrational to more or less dismantle our modern way of life.
We are living in a very different time now, obviously. It is a delicate balancing act to be sure, but there is indeed a limit [https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216] to how much even a super power like the U.S. [https://www.fairus.org/issue/population-environment/united-states-already-overpopulated] can support. The more people there are in a given territory, the more resoures it requires to facilitate them and restabilize. It isn't enough to just say, "Oh but there's all this land that's still untouched..." because well, that's kind of the point; we need a lot of that land to stay that way. It goes without saying that unchecked human development will have devastating consequences to the human race itself, let alone the only planet itself that we know of within a few hundred light years to support life. Basic observation should be enough to see we're either getting dangerously close to a tipping point, or are simply too incompetent to manage what we already have very effectively.
It is also inevitable to have all kinds of inequality, especially in terms of income. Bandaid fixes like increased welfare and universal basic income hikes will only go so far though. The key to improving the situation and our standing ultimately lies with heavy investment in education and human capital. [https://www.thebalance.com/income-inequality-in-america-3306190]
It isn't a perfect world, and there's no shortage of hard knocks in the life, especially for that of an immigrant in many cases. A line has to be drawn somewhere though, even if it runs over some people's toes. That's just a basic fact of the natural world, were pretty much everyone can recall several instances of getting shit on in their own lives. I could never speak for or condone much of Trump's behavior or conduct, but on the other hand we've also had decades prior of failed and lax immigration policy from no shortage of politicians that have laid the groundwork for the crisis that's currently under way.
It's a nice thought that there could be an ideal solution to all the various human and social inequities, but neither side has been able to find them. The fact that there always seems to be a need for "sides" in the first place could be a leading indication as to why. How does anyone go about balancing the complex world we've created for ourselves?
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
mwah?
I have the impression that where Trump's mouth is, is where the money isn't, and if it is it soon won't be. Can you enlighten us to these 'money adjacent to Trump's mouth' happenings?
If high tax rates on the rich were the answer, it would have worked by now. Scott Hodge, the Tax Foundation?s president, says: ?Almost no other industrialized nation depends on the rich to pay the bills more than the United States.? [https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/sorry-mr-obama-heres-why-raising-taxes-the-rich-wont-work]
And here I thought we didn't want European style "socialism" because our taxes would go up, but now I hear our taxes on rich people are already higher? Which is it?
If trickle down economics worked, it'd've worked by now. Instead we have runaway income inequality.
Threads like this are why I don't watch the news. The only time the news media is honest is during natural disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes. When it comes to politics, nobody is honest, nobody expresses how they truly feel, nobody reports facts. It's all cherry picked shit designed to support whatever argument needs supporting at the moment.
Threads like this are why I don't watch the news. The only time the news media is honest is during natural disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes. When it comes to politics, nobody is honest, nobody expresses how they truly feel, nobody reports facts. It's all cherry picked shit designed to support whatever argument needs supporting at the moment.
Now head on back to your hidey-hole enjoying your "superiority" by being above it all as the world continues to get worse. I'm sure that'll work out just dandy!
Threads like this are why I don't watch the news. The only time the news media is honest is during natural disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes. When it comes to politics, nobody is honest, nobody expresses how they truly feel, nobody reports facts. It's all cherry picked shit designed to support whatever argument needs supporting at the moment.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
Democrats, or people in reality don't understand the "spoilered part", because as pointed out above, the spoilered part was in fact false information and AOC was actually right. " the whole AOC clown car" was provably a lie, as shown already in this thread and corrected. As shown above, the ICE agent was avoiding the part of the law that AOC was addressing and was the one who was inaccurate. People seeking asylum do not need to do so at the port of entry according the the law itself, nor are they violating their ability to claim asylum in the US as falsely stated by the former ICE director. It is not a crime for them to cross into the US wherever they can and turn themselves in as they have been doing under US asylum law.
Trump, regardless of him thinking he can do whatever he wants, does not actually write the laws, nor can he change them at will by executive order, congress does. Trump and his administration have been in violation of numerous court orders on his handling of immigration and is actually breaking the law.
The US has no problem "being able" to take care of our own citizens, it is just Republicans prevent the US from doing so. There is more than enough to go around in the US, the US is no where near over populated, in fact many towns are shrinking to the point of not existing instead. Like Warren stated in the debates last night, Even a 2% wealth tax on those with over $50 million in wealth (approximately 75,000 families) assets would be enough to generate over $2.75 trillion to use on programs to "take care of the people" alone. Repuplicans instead take from the poor and middle class to allow the already wealthy to take even more. It is false that Republicans do not support welfare in the US, they actually do, they just only support welfare for the wealthy and allow them to pay less percentages of taxes than the middle class do. Republicans have no issue giving out dole to the corporations and wealthy businessmen who back them, just not to those who will die without help. Instead of your taxes being used to help you and others like you when life becomes difficult, they use your tax money to pay Corporations CEO Salaries instead.
I live in one of the highest immigration regions in North America and I am not seeing that the US actually has an "immigration problem". The only problem I really see the US having right now is they have people who don't know their head from their arse running things so they are making things worse, not better. It is a bit ironic though that a person whose tribe has been on this continent longer than most anyone is telling you that North America does not have an immigration problem and thinks you do not have a right to close off access to this land to others. Who gets to decide you get to come in and lock the door behind you? These families coming in have just as much right to be here as you do, as your ancestors did and should be welcomed just the same. They are just as important as you are, as I am, and there is no reason this should ever be viewed as an " us vs them" issue in the first place and I have no idea why you are attempting to make it out to be one.
You should also take a closer look at who you are saying has "never had to experience the effect of these things" because many of our representatives came from meager means themselves. Of course there are plenty of "come from wealth" people in congress, however, those that are the most outspoken on protecting immigrants are often the ones who come from immigrant families and have struggled themselves.
Immigrants and children of immigrants make up at least 13% of congress:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/24/in-116th-congress-at-least-13-of-lawmakers-are-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants/
It is also interesting how many Republicans who want to stop others from having the same rights that were afforded to their own families. Under's Trump's own Proposals, his wife would lose her citizenship since she violated her visa and lied on her citizenship
application. Mitch McConnell's wife arrived in the US on a cargo ship from China and did not speak any English. What is Trump doing to people in their same circumstance today? Are they getting the same chance afforded to their own families or are they just greedy hypocrites that are trying to hoard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for themselves while denying it to everyone else?
They have no problem giving out opportunity to their own spouses and themselves, but will torture and punish other families for doing the same. It is sadist tbh and against everything the US is supposed to stand for in the first place. It isn't just "his mouth" that is the problem here, it is his policies.
The problem isn't as simple as assigning all blame to evil Republican forces. It also has to do with the fact that Democratic leadership can be deceiving [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/12/27/liberal-priorities-all-seem-to-hurt-the-poor/#24d402742db5] and has routinely failed [https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/how-decades-of-democratic-rule-ruined-some-of-our-finest-cities/] the voters who've put faith in them.
Democratic leadership is more about empowering the government than it is empowering the people. The reason republicans have typically given tax breaks to the wealthy is simply because they are typically the ones driving economic growth. If high tax rates on the rich were the answer, it would have worked by now. Scott Hodge, the Tax Foundation?s president, says: ?Almost no other industrialized nation depends on the rich to pay the bills more than the United States.? [https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/sorry-mr-obama-heres-why-raising-taxes-the-rich-wont-work]
Ah yes, citing a Republican think-tank funded by billionaires and an economist who's literally arguing that improved labor standards will hurt the poor. Hell not only does he do that, but he also argues that concentrating all of the pollution and trash in poor areas is actually a good thing for them because it wouldn't be fair for the wealthy to have it in theirs. Fuck me dude do you even read the articles you post? Another one of them is literally a guy going "when a Democrat is in office, THINGS BAD. When a Republican is in office THINGS GOOD. Here are my examples completely void of context."
Democratic leadership is more about empowering the government than it is empowering the people. The reason republicans have typically given tax breaks to the wealthy is simply because they are typically the ones driving economic growth.
The reason republicans have typically given tax breaks to the wealthy is simply because they are typically the ones driving economic growth. If high tax rates on the rich were the answer, it would have worked by now. Scott Hodge, the Tax Foundation?s president, says: ?Almost no other industrialized nation depends on the rich to pay the bills more than the United States.? [https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/sorry-mr-obama-heres-why-raising-taxes-the-rich-wont-work]
1) Of course the rich are needed to pay the bills so much: they earn so much of the income.
In a country where the top 1% earn 25% of national income, assuming roughly even tax burdens they'll contribute 25% of tax revenues. In a country where the top 1% earn 10% of national income, they'll contribute 10% of tax revenues. This potentially doesn't tell us anything about tax, it tells us about income distribution. let's explore this more.
2) Scott Hodge there provides us with the most common go-to fudge of people against taxing the rich: he talks exclusively about income tax.
But income tax really isn't the only tax. Income tax is only about half of Federal revenues... and then there's all the non-federal taxation too, for the state and local services, which comes to about the same as Federal revenues. So Scott Hodge's argument is that the rich are paying a disproportionate amount of just a quarter of the USA's total tax burden. What about the other three quarters?
So now check out the graph here [https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/just-how-progressive-is-the-tax-system/], of the total tax burdens (local, state and federal) by income group. Basically, we can see that the average median earner is paying a similar percentage of their income in tax (27%) as the average top 1%er (31%). Only the two poorest quintiles are paying substantially less, the and the second lowest isn't that much lower at 22%. Skip to the next graph, in fact it turns out the top 1% earn ~22% of the income and pay ~23% of the total tax burden! So, no, they really are not shouldering a disproportionate burden of the tax, as per point (1).
3) The best rationale for not taxing the rich is usually that national wealth growth, long term, is mostly dependent on productivity growth. As productivity growth is mostly dependent on investment (new and more efficient technologies), and the wealthy invest more, therefore give the wealthy more money and so investment and productivity increases. Even this can be dubious, however. Corporate profits (and thus the wealth of the rich) are dependent on people buying things, so if the poor have more money, it's often going to drive corporate growth and profits anyway. Also, cheap labour may decrease productivity growth, because it can be cheaper to hire more workers than improve productivity.
Edit: It has been pointed out that much of the information I posted was inaccurate due to personal bias and lack of proper research. The original shall be left up for the sake of context
Saelune said:
Ok, I doubt you too. Why is she a moron? We live in a world where Trump is president and people defend that, but he is just, a HUGE FUCKING IDIOT!
Great, Antifa aint doing shit. Antifa is a right-wing dog-whistle. How many people have they killed? Now how many people have the police killed? How many have right-wing terrorists killed? Name me ONE place shot up by Antifa, cause I got multiple cases of right-wing mass shooters.
A cop just said AOC should be shot, but lets shit on AOC, right?
I mean, I wasn't planning to turn this into a thread of me bashing AOC besides the one off comment, but if you want my full run down on that one.
I can bring up the 20 min press Conference in which its stated that trumps alleged racist remarks are called "a distraction for the news media" while simultaneously holding a press Conference for a rebuttal(because that's logically consistent).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g&t=
Here's one regarding the "concentration camps" in which an officer refutes a lie she told about immigrants being made to "drink out of toilets"
EDIT: As was pointed out by another user, It would appear that AOC later clarifies that the sink unit of the particular facility she visited was broken and detainies were told to drink from the toilet instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNxesruXVM
She also thinks illegal immegrants shouldn't be targeted by ICE at all. Like, just give them free reign apparently. You can argue all day about their treatment, that's a seperate issue. Enforce the laws in some form or fashion.
She also doesn't understand that crossing a boarder illegally is, well, illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEFoi_leYDw
And I could go all day from there. Basic point is, I'd like for the Democrats to succeed in 2020. And part of their agenda should be to tell this woman to put a sock in it so she doesn't ruin it for the rest of them. Same goes for a number of other representatives in the party.
As far as Antifa goes, your criteria for allowing people to complain about something is that it has to reach an arbitrary number on a violence scale otherwise it's not worth talking about? That doesn't sound feasible.
The problem is the Democratic Party in general also doesn?t seem to understand that fact in the spoilered part. They also don?t have an answer as to how we?re supposed to taken care of hundreds of thousands of illegals when we?ve never been able to do so for our own citizens in the first place. A lot of opinions would also most likely change if these politicians stepped out of their gated communities and started experiencing the effects of mass-immigration and refugee intake more personally. Kinda like saying they?re so concerned for the environment and lament the lack of concern over climate change right before they?re whisked off in a deluxe package Suburban after giving their moving speeches.
If more ?leaders? were willing to put their money where their mouth was, maybe things would actually improve. That?s basically what Trump started out as and why he gathered such a following. Retain that aspect but put a more pragmatic, well spoken and civil person were in the running and we might be onto something.
Democrats, or people in reality don't understand the "spoilered part", because as pointed out above, the spoilered part was in fact false information and AOC was actually right. " the whole AOC clown car" was provably a lie, as shown already in this thread and corrected. As shown above, the ICE agent was avoiding the part of the law that AOC was addressing and was the one who was inaccurate. People seeking asylum do not need to do so at the port of entry according the the law itself, nor are they violating their ability to claim asylum in the US as falsely stated by the former ICE director. It is not a crime for them to cross into the US wherever they can and turn themselves in as they have been doing under US asylum law.
Trump, regardless of him thinking he can do whatever he wants, does not actually write the laws, nor can he change them at will by executive order, congress does. Trump and his administration have been in violation of numerous court orders on his handling of immigration and is actually breaking the law.
The US has no problem "being able" to take care of our own citizens, it is just Republicans prevent the US from doing so. There is more than enough to go around in the US, the US is no where near over populated, in fact many towns are shrinking to the point of not existing instead. Like Warren stated in the debates last night, Even a 2% wealth tax on those with over $50 million in wealth (approximately 75,000 families) assets would be enough to generate over $2.75 trillion to use on programs to "take care of the people" alone. Repuplicans instead take from the poor and middle class to allow the already wealthy to take even more. It is false that Republicans do not support welfare in the US, they actually do, they just only support welfare for the wealthy and allow them to pay less percentages of taxes than the middle class do. Republicans have no issue giving out dole to the corporations and wealthy businessmen who back them, just not to those who will die without help. Instead of your taxes being used to help you and others like you when life becomes difficult, they use your tax money to pay Corporations CEO Salaries instead.
I live in one of the highest immigration regions in North America and I am not seeing that the US actually has an "immigration problem". The only problem I really see the US having right now is they have people who don't know their head from their arse running things so they are making things worse, not better. It is a bit ironic though that a person whose tribe has been on this continent longer than most anyone is telling you that North America does not have an immigration problem and thinks you do not have a right to close off access to this land to others. Who gets to decide you get to come in and lock the door behind you? These families coming in have just as much right to be here as you do, as your ancestors did and should be welcomed just the same. They are just as important as you are, as I am, and there is no reason this should ever be viewed as an " us vs them" issue in the first place and I have no idea why you are attempting to make it out to be one.
You should also take a closer look at who you are saying has "never had to experience the effect of these things" because many of our representatives came from meager means themselves. Of course there are plenty of "come from wealth" people in congress, however, those that are the most outspoken on protecting immigrants are often the ones who come from immigrant families and have struggled themselves.
Immigrants and children of immigrants make up at least 13% of congress:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/24/in-116th-congress-at-least-13-of-lawmakers-are-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants/
It is also interesting how many Republicans who want to stop others from having the same rights that were afforded to their own families. Under's Trump's own Proposals, his wife would lose her citizenship since she violated her visa and lied on her citizenship
application. Mitch McConnell's wife arrived in the US on a cargo ship from China and did not speak any English. What is Trump doing to people in their same circumstance today? Are they getting the same chance afforded to their own families or are they just greedy hypocrites that are trying to hoard life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for themselves while denying it to everyone else?
They have no problem giving out opportunity to their own spouses and themselves, but will torture and punish other families for doing the same. It is sadist tbh and against everything the US is supposed to stand for in the first place. It isn't just "his mouth" that is the problem here, it is his policies.
The problem isn't as simple as assigning all blame to evil Republican forces. It also has to do with the fact that Democratic leadership can be deceiving [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/12/27/liberal-priorities-all-seem-to-hurt-the-poor/#24d402742db5] and has routinely failed [https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/how-decades-of-democratic-rule-ruined-some-of-our-finest-cities/] the voters who've put faith in them.
Democratic leadership is more about empowering the government than it is empowering the people. The reason republicans have typically given tax breaks to the wealthy is simply because they are typically the ones driving economic growth. If high tax rates on the rich were the answer, it would have worked by now. Scott Hodge, the Tax Foundation?s president, says: ?Almost no other industrialized nation depends on the rich to pay the bills more than the United States.? [https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/sorry-mr-obama-heres-why-raising-taxes-the-rich-wont-work]
Another problem is even if it did work, it wouldn't be as simple as "tax the rich, reap the benefits". The tax system as it stands is already a nightmare, and the additional wealth taxes proposed would likely be an impractical, logistical and legal dumpster fire [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/your-money/tax-wealthy.html] that would essentially require scrapping the whole system and starting from scratch. Our government doesn't have the best track record of getting much of anything done from scratch the last few generations.
Democratic socialism sounds nice, but what the latest proponents in the running fail to mention is that strong capitalistic foundations [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/amp/] were first required to get to that point without disasterous consequences. They are also still experimenting. When people like Sanders and AOC point to Nordic countries as leading examples of what works, they probably didn't mention how much of the burden the lower and middle class still bear [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/07/26/native-of-scandinavia-debunks-myth-of-nordic-countries-as-socialist/amp/], along with - surprise - lenient corporate taxation like here in the U.S.
The truth is no perfect system exists, and sadly human nature is largely to blame. The same goes for immigration policy. When colonists first set up shop in North America, they were escaping what they saw to be injustice and aimed to build a better system from scratch. They certainly made colossal mistakes along the way (Native American exploitation, oppression, even extermination in some cases, African slavery, etc.) but what's done is done. Learn from it and adapt to improve, but it would be irrational to more or less dismantle our modern way of life.
We are living in a very different time now, obviously. It is a delicate balancing act to be sure, but there is indeed a limit [https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216] to how much even a super power like the U.S. [https://www.fairus.org/issue/population-environment/united-states-already-overpopulated] can support. The more people there are in a given territory, the more resoures it requires to facilitate them and restabilize. It isn't enough to just say, "Oh but there's all this land that's still untouched..." because well, that's kind of the point; we need a lot of that land to stay that way. It goes without saying that unchecked human development will have devastating consequences to the human race itself, let alone the only planet itself that we know of within a few hundred light years to support life. Basic observation should be enough to see we're either getting dangerously close to a tipping point, or are simply too incompetent to manage what we already have very effectively.
It is also inevitable to have all kinds of inequality, especially in terms of income. Bandaid fixes like increased welfare and universal basic income hikes will only go so far though. The key to improving the situation and our standing ultimately lies with heavy investment in education and human capital. [https://www.thebalance.com/income-inequality-in-america-3306190]
It isn't a perfect world, and there's no shortage of hard knocks in the life, especially for that of an immigrant in many cases. A line has to be drawn somewhere though, even if it runs over some people's toes. That's just a basic fact of the natural world, were pretty much everyone can recall several instances of getting shit on in their own lives. I could never speak for or condone much of Trump's behavior or conduct, but on the other hand we've also had decades prior of failed and lax immigration policy from no shortage of politicians that have laid the groundwork for the crisis that's currently under way.
It's a nice thought that there could be an ideal solution to all the various human and social inequities, but neither side has been able to find them. The fact that there always seems to be a need for "sides" in the first place could be a leading indication as to why. How does anyone go about balancing the complex world we've created for ourselves?
Trickle-down doesn't work because rich people hoard their wealth and only buy from other rich people. They aren't regularly buying millions of dollars of stuff from mom and pop stores, and often aren't even buying locally from our own country. Buying an island in Dubai does literally nothing for the poor of America.
If the goal is to get money in the hands of the people without it, then why the middle-man? Oh right, cause they don't want to put that money in the hands of people without it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
