Just Joshin'

If Trump was a fascist he would have used the COVID-19 to exercise and gain more power. He did not do so - he delegated to the states as part of the federalist model. The democrat/liberal Governors did use the COVID-19 to enhance and enforce more control over the people in their states. This is how fascism starts. Some Republican Governors put controls in place but rolled them back quickly when they saw they were not needed. Why are democrat states so slow to respond?

Have ya googled greg persons? Would be be stupid enough to use real name?

The 28% should live where there is no police. A good social experiment on police vs no police. I am guessing they would not volunteer for what they want to force on others.

Once this is passed, real estate values will drop as people who can rush out will rush out of the city. The net result will be further inequality caused by a terrible policy.

Is that allowed, even in PPP? Following the example of his/her leader Joe who once dropped out after he was shown to be a serial plagiarizer.

A class act and a voice of reason. I hope he stays with the Bills in any capacity.

Intent does not not equal done. I suspect then calmer heads prevail, this will not occur. Then again, Minn is trying hard to be NY or CA. Why don't we sell some guns to the cartels and then track them when they return to the US?

Even Harvey passed on AOC.

I'm thinking 3-4-3 or die.

The actual consequence of rent control are negative. Two things occur: 1. The landlord stops improving the existing spaces because their revenue is called while expenses increase (taxes, other services). The units degrade and become less desirable. 2. New construction will stop. The cost to build and maintain will be in excess of the return. The solution is actually the opposite. 1. Reduce taxes. These costs either get passed along to the renters. 2. Reduce the paperwork and regulations. The cost to build in very much in excess of the physical cost. It adds time and money which increase the cost which increases the rent. 3. Increase the places where new construction can occur. Zoning limits and NIMBY activists keep new construction down. In short, reduce the costs and barriers to new construction. This will increase the supply and reduce total costs which reduce rents.

It is not the actions but what they call themselves - you should know better. They identify as antifascist so they are antifascist. Their actions do not count.

I have been off about 12 years but here is one example per your request. When doing a building project we had to select certain vendors as part pf the state aid. We could not select local, community based contractors who would have offered a lower cost. So the taxpayers paid more and the local community lost out on a source of revenue. Here is a great one.....we had a teacher commit a sexual offense with a student. The student was consensual but it was still illegal. He admitted to this but we were still required to suspend with pay until the state defined process played out. He was on the books for over a year and a half while the process paid out. Finally the state took his license (while the other legal issues continued) allowing us to fire him.

Just when you think he could get no worse........

I don't believe anyone is anti-education. Society benefits from a well education population. We can also agree that it is broken. The US spends more on education with less results. Yes, broken. Now why is it broken? The liberal policies of the last 50 years have not improved the outcomes. So you are advocating changing those policies - again we can agree. Other than spend $, what do you recommend? Let me start - I was on a school board (unpaid) for 10 years with 6 as VP or President. First thing I would change is the regulations that are imposed on districts with no benefit to the educational result. These are not student oriented but in fact hurt the children. Simplify and give the control back to the local communities to tailor a program that meets those needs. What works in a rural district will not work in a suburban or urban district. OK - your turn.

mmmm......I tried in the "Defund the Police?" thread and you turned it into a sh**show. I wanted to see the other side's POV and you brought the same garbage as in this thread. Maybe it proves there are no liberal solutions, only talking points.

I think the correct term is useful idiot.

Good write-up but you do know facts are racist.

In 11 pages, no one has been able to justify why defunding the police would improve conditions. The only argument for defunding is "Racism" and those who oppose are racist. Many valid arguments have been made why this is a bad idea. The drive to the left is going to end up like the french revolution - they eventually turn on themselves. This can be seen yesterday with JK Rowling and Jacob Frey. Both are very liberal but now get called out when they break ranks with the far, far left. The interesting thing is that this movement may be what gets Trump elected as the law and order president.

How many buildings looted/burned or cops assaulted by these "idiots"? Did they fire a shot?

First thanks for the reply. So you want to swap budgets. How do you handle the impact of less police and more crime? What does not get addressed? So do you thuink there are too many police and the crime rate would not go down with less police?

No place nicer than WNY in the summer. This is why we split time now between WNY and Texas. The summer heat & humidity in Texas is as bad as the winter in WNY. Only advantage is no shoveling.

So as I suspected there are many reasons NOT to defund the police = not one person has made an argument on why this is a good thing. Where are the resident libs? Trying to have a conversation here, no judgements even though I do not agree with the defunding movement.

Not at all and can see no redeeming value. Trying to understand why anyone would think it is a good idea. The libs on here may be able to help with their POV.

Curious to whom is in favor of defunding the police and the benefits of doing so? If in favor of this, please help explain why this is better and the outcomes it will produce. Any negative impacts?

Hard to believe that a respected medical publication would ruin their reputation just to make Trump look bad. What makes people want to hurt others to get a shot in at Trump?