KRC

Dictator!!!

Thank you for the detailed response. Here are my thoughts: -As far as private versus public assistance, I see no reason why private cannot still work on a larger scale than the founding fathers. We need to look at who is getting assistance, why they are getting assistance, and how long they need the assistance. I think you and I both can agree (I may be wrong, so correct me please), there are people who definitely need the assistance and those who are just freeloaders because it is monetarily more beneficial to sit on your ass and get government assistance than it is to work for a living. To me, we should not be funding the latter, regardless of whether it is public or private. Money should go to those who are truly in need. Full stop. -The argument can be made that Bloomberg spending billions on political races is actually a benefit to those in need, more than giving a donation. If he feels that spending that money to get the right candidates in office will have a better long-term effect than a single donation of a bunch of money, that is his choice. They can put policies and programs in place that will have lasting impacts. Whether right or wrong, he is doing what he feels is best with the money he earned. It is not up to the government to determine how to spend his money. It is up to him. Again, the arguments can be made on both sides on electing people to push the policies he favors versus sending a bunch of money to the government or to private charities, and which is more beneficial long-term. -Again on Bloomberg: Yes, other people helped him earn his money (his employees) and they were compensated to do so. If they felt they deserved more, they should have asked for a raise or gone elsewhere. People are paid what they are worth and what they are willing to accept (which is why I am against price floors in the form of minimum wage). If you don't like it, you are not entitled to the job you have. If you are valuable to the company, they will compensate you. If they do not compensate you accordingly, you will be valuable to another company who would be happy to have you. If you have little or no marketable skills, you are not going to be paid very much. -No, you can't have my $0.02, you freeloader. ?

Seriously. This can only be handled by having secret meetings in the basement of the Capital building with certain items selectively leaked that benefits the party in charge while suppressing anything that goes against the chosen narrative by the party in charge. That is how you get rid of an authoritarian government.

Trump had three scoops last night. ?

They would first "roll back the Trump tax cuts." You know, because that is not a tax increase. It is taking back what is rightfully the governments. Then, just a "smaller" increase in taxes, because "how can you possibly be against the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, Free College tuition, Student Loan Forgiveness, etc. you cold-hearted bastard?"

IMO, this is where conservatives (not Republicans) differ with liberals (not Democrats). Liberals want to see the government take control of this issue. Conservatives want to see the private sector take control. Arguments can be made on both sides. However, my personal opinion is that it should be handled in the private sector. The government has proven that they are incapable of being efficient with my money. There is not one single program that is efficiently run. Money just goes down a black hole. Granted, there are private companies and charities that are the same, but I have a choice on where I donate my money. I can see the ineffective charities that are bloated with executive pay and other bureaucratic nonsense and can funnel my money where it would do the most good. If we were to have a government solution, it should be pushed to the closest government to the actual problem. Therefore, local governments should be responsible for taking care of local residents. By the time the fed has taken their cut to pay for the bureaucracy, then the state takes their cut to pay for the bureaucracy, there is not much left on the local level to actually implement it. Keep it local and let the locals determine where the money is needed the most. Just my $0.02.

1. Go to the Politics sub forum of a football message board. 2. Steal ideas from a poster. 3. ? 4. Pulitzer!!

FTFY

Post reported to the mods.

That is a nod to the deceased demographic, which is a large voting block for the Dems.

I heard that KRC guy ran for president a while back.

The storylines are obviously intense, so it is not something I, personally, would be able to binge watch. I watch a couple of episodes at a time, then watch something lighter.

Anyone watching Hunters on Prime?

To be fair, that is a pretty low bar.

Can you fit under the seat in front of you or in the overhead compartment? Otherwise, you will need to be checked and put in the cargo hold.

Ditto what you said. I was in East Germany and East Berlin before the wall came down. Why anyone would purposely want to live under those conditions is mind boggling.

Damn you. Now I am hungry for pasta.

Just ask Russia.

If {insert pronoun} is here to get people to vote Green, {insert pronoun} is not doing a very good job.

Yup. Strong Bernie supporter here. Can't you tell from my posting history?

Are you having a stroke? Because your posts are becoming more and more incoherent.

Repatriation was big. Why would people bring money back to the US when it is more economically feasible to keep it in places like Ireland that have lower tax rates?

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.