Page #37
Pages: #1... #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 ...#46
New Comment Rating: -4 Similar topics: 1.American men? 2.nude 3.Donald Trump 45th President of United States 4.🎆 🇺🇸 HaPpY BiRtHdAy America!! 🇺🇸 🎆 5.The Nobel Peace Prize 🏅 Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
"Two-thirds of the House of Representatives would have to vote in favor for Santos to be expelled, a bar unlikely to be reached in a chamber that Republicans control by a narrow 222-213 margin."
So, we will see if 'the party of law and order' will side with the criminal, as usual.
Does Santos get a recall election? And if he loses?
Can the Republicans just replace him with who ever the want?
Do the Republicans retain the seat, to elect a Republican?
Or is the seat up for grabs by an open election?
Your the American, so you should know.
and if there is another republican alternative in the primary,then that idiot wont get my vote
Sure, you can vote one out who was responsible for keeping on Santos, but by what standards do you hold his replacement, so you know that person wouldn't have done the exact same thing?
It's up to the people to vote for the representative that they want.
Expulsion is a process used by other representatives for ethics violations.
Whatever puppet you are referring to, has been duly elected and has not been implicated in any ethics violations.
What is a step to socialism? It would be socialism, if party members decided
(in party meetings) that the representative is not representing their best interests anymore, vote that representative out and that representative gives back their seat to a newly elected representative of the party. That's real democracy.
That's how it is done in my Socialist Party, from the bottom to the top.
It doesn't happen a lot, because my party vets their representatives way better. They would never put up someone for election, who is has lied about literally everything, like George Santos did. We demand to be represented honestly.
What do you like? A rich narcissist conman, who lies 24/7 and only serves
his own interests, no matter how much it hurts the party and its voters?
If you think I'm describing a particular Republican, I don't, the description
fits literally all Republicans.
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes
Please help us Ron Desantis
How the hell do you reduce Trump's corruption to just pussygrabbing?
How about him making business deals with Saudi developers, renting out hotel rooms to the Saudi prince that were never used, for many times the normal price, and Jared Kushner making a € 2 billion deal, while selling them billions of dollars in weaponry to commit a genocide in Yemen.
Whatever you are claiming about Biden pales in comparison, even if it was true.
You even have to go back to his time as vice president, for any examples at all.
Ron DeSantis is also a rich narcissist conman, who lies 24/7 and only serves
his own interests, no matter how much it hurts the party and its voters?
BUT the democrats have a woman that is wheeled in to the building ,has no idea where the hell she is or what day of the week it is, but it is legally ok to keep her in position because she can vote to stack the supreme court. She is NOT able to represent her voters, that is unfair and should be fixed.
But there is no outrage about that. That is my beef.BOTH should be gone.
I have just as much access to information as you.
Almost every American is telling me that the politicians from the other side are corrupt. And all of them are correct. But it's the Republicans who created that system, by legalizing bribery.
Here's a very clear video, not even 6 minutes long, explaining corruption:
only registered users can see external links
'Citizens United' is a ridiculous name for making unlimited bribery legal
(it should have been called 'Bribes unlimited'), but that's how Republicans pass laws. It's meant for their voters, who are not able to understand more
or are not interested in learning more, than the name of a law or the headline of a news article.
Supreme court justices supporting 'Citizens United':
Anthony M. Kennedy / nominated by Ronald Reagan (R)
John G. Roberts, Jr. / nominated by George W. Bush (R)
Antonin Scalia / nominated by Richard Nixon (R)
Clarence Thomas / nominated by George H. W. Bush (R)
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. / nominated by George H. W. Bush (R)
Against:
John Paul Stevens / Although appointed by a Republican, over time Justice Stevens emerged as a leader for the Court’s liberal wing.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg / nominated by Bill Clinton (D)
Stephen G. Breyer / nominated by Bill Clinton (D)
Sonia Sotomayor / nominated by George H. W. Bush (R) "Her disagreement in that case highlighted the liberal views she has voiced throughout her six years and counting on the court."
Every other law before it, making bribing of politicians easier, can also be traced back to Republicans.
I don't have to live in the USA to know that, it's all globally available.
It's all public records and globally available news articles, like these ones:
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
You tell me what's a lie there or how this relates to 'socialism'.
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 728 hours
You have still never answered my question of how it is hurting the poor to ask them to do something for themselves? It is not a hard question.And if anyone can answer it, it would be leaps and bounds toward understanding why they are poor and why all the help in the world will never change it for the long term.
You didn't answer my question, How is asking the poor to do something to help themselves making them suffer?
Show me a food stamp person that works. You can't even own a car worth more than 2000 dollars to be on food stamps and you can not have over 2000 dollars in the bank,nor can you own a home.
--------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
only registered users can see external links
This is Florida and national. You are wrong. People do work and get food stamps. Also, you can have any car. What you can't have is more than$2000 in equity. You can also own a house. Check your facts. SNAP benefits are administer by the states. Maybe your state's rules are different.
This may be a state to state thing. I do know they are NOT easy to get for someone that has anything or has accomplished anything in the past. ,income wise I would qualify but because I choose to hang to what few things I own of value I worked hard for,I can't get them.
I refer to it as legislated poverty.
Again it shows how little hard work is appreciated when you do happen to get down and need a helping hand, you have to give up everything you gained and start at the bottom and Hope you get back at least to where you were before,before you get to old.
600 dollars a week at 10 bucks a hour.2400 a month, She more than likely gets all her taxes back that she has paid in as a refund.
More than I ever made working on my job
I don't know the answer to her situation if that is not enough.Is she single,Married?
I thought food stamps were for folks that couldn't work?
And I can say this,with experiance. You can NOT expect to get wealthy working for the taxpayer.
You are a civil servant when you work for the government and you are doing it for the better of your community,state and country. You should expect to earn a living. But not get wealthier than the folks paying your salary.
.
I was out looking for a job just as I was supposed to be and then found the 1 I worked until I got hurt.
It is not asking to much of people to come out the woods and do something to earn their way IF THEY ARE ABLE. In my case, no employer wants someone who can get dizzy and fall down.The most hurtful words I have ever heard were the words, "GET this sumbitch away from my workplace NOW before he gets hurt again or hurts someone else". The words my boss used talking to the workers comp rep.
THere is no excuse for able bodied people not to do something to earn at least part of their way in life.
--------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
She is a Puerto Rican with many kids and her husband is a lazy ass that doesn’t work either I must be doing something wrong
BUT if she got hurt on a job or something ,she may have bought a new car when she received her settlement considering it a investment in reliable transportation for many years to come.
Or at least that is how I figured expenses on stuff, I bought a few things to make life better and that would last a long time.
You just called 56% of Americans lazy and stupid.
In The Netherlands, only 19% of people have has less than $3000,- saved.
I guess, the Dutch are way less lazy and stupid than Americans.
Braggadocios
Self centered
Egotistical
And stuck up on your selves
Braggadocios
Self centered
Egotistical
And stuck up on your selves
And clearly having a culture of thinking poor people are lazy and stupid,
does not create less poor people.
I'm not patting myself on the back, I'm just trying to show you how wrong you are.
My father was a mechanic and my mother only worked one day a week as pharmacy assistant. We were not really poor, because my father was smart enough to buy his first apartment, when houses were still cheap. Because we lived very frugally, we had enough to eat, could go on holliday ones a year and we had a car. It was the cheapest shit car available, but my father always bought it new and then drove it until it died. My brother is still driving one of them, which is now 25 years old.
I also put myself through school. I paid most of it myself, with money I borrowed from the state and almost no interest. I ended up with a debt of around $20,000, after 10 years of study and I paid off that debt in 15 years.
You know that is not possible in the US. My parents would have never been able to provide me with a comparable education in the US.
My country invested in me, by partially funding the higher education system, by providing student benefits, by providing free public transport to students and by providing loans at almost no interest. It was the good times for me. They have cut that down a bit since then, but I would still have the opportunity to do about half the study I had.
I'm now repaying what my government invested in me, in more taxes, because I make more money now, than I would have made, if I couldn't have had my education.
That's what government is intended for; maximizing the opportunities of their citizens, so the country benefits from them having better jobs and creating a more high tech economy.
How is that 'boot straps' strategy working out for your citizens?
Isn't it only working out for the 10% richest people?
You have the wealthiest billionaires, but the bottom 60% of Americans is way worse off than the bottom 60% of Dutch people. That shows that the bottom 60% of Americans do not profit from your billionaires having bigger mansions and bigger yachts than our billionaires.
My father worked and put back money for my college ,he had high hopes for me but I didn't make his goal of being a doctor or anything of that sort. College course I took not related to the electronics I paid for out of my pocket with money I earned landscaping and mowing grass. That would be the welding and auto body repair portion of my education.
You still benefited from the government subsidizing education, but they are not doing that as much today. And you don't offer the same chance you got, to young people now, because you don't want to pay for the taxes. That's selfish.
It's also shortsighted, because you would benefit from young people doing better.
Matter of fact they have expanded to offer construction equipment operator course ,which if I was college age I would have took a few of those to have a extra skill under my belt I could use for employment chances if need be.
And several other courses are offered to. So a equal chance is there for people that I had.
only registered users can see external links
Good for you, that you accomplished something without the help of the government. Do you want a cookie for it? Lots of people in your country go nowhere, because the need the government's help. It doesn't just hurt them, it hurts you too. You would have more customers, if more people had any money to spend.
Your thinking is twisted to a pretzel. My government is doing what I want; helping people to make it. You're just doing what your government wants; not demanding anything from them, while they steal all your money and fill their pockets.
But why do you need to fly under their radar?
They love you. You work your ass off and ask for nothing in return.
That's being a good serf to your lords. And you also buy lots of guns and enrich their donors. They fucking love you too.
The government hates my guts. I'm annoying the hell out of them
with my demands of equality and calls for responsibility and justice.
But I'm standing proudly against them.
I was thinking about this yesterday riding around mowing the 3 acres.
I ask alot of my government.
I ask for a secure nation.1 that all enemy's foreign and domestic are afraid to even consider attacking.
But if it is attacked, I ask of my government to have a well equipped military that can launch a offensive that will squash any threat.
I also ask of my government to continue to safe guard my rights. Right to bear arms, right to free speech, and right to a speedy trial among others. The rules are written, I just ask they enforce them.
I also ask of my government to supply a good hwy system. I pay fuel taxes and other fees to cover the cost, and I expect them to hold up their end of the deal. Instead, I have to dodge a pot hole just to get out of my driveway now.
I also ask of my government to make sure the food I eat, the liquid I drink, the medicines I take, are safe.
I ask alot of my government.
But the 1 thing I ask of the most, is something you can't seem to grasp, allow me to accomplish my goals and make something of myself by my own fucking hands. brains and hard work instead of tying my hands and those of my employers with rules and regulations that leave us all sitting on our ass's having to depend on government hand outs.
I don't see how what you said makes any sense?
A man using his muscles ,hands ,brains, to be productive and earn a living is PART of what gives him purpose. Stealing doesn't.
Then he could ride thru Texas and see the oil fields and men working,perhaps ride by Elons space complex and see the people working NON UNION jobs and being paid well.Just some of what he needs to see.
I could somehow find my way over to his place but I would see water, damns, windmill pumps that if they quit for 10 minutes I would be swimming ,people driving roller skate cars or byclces because fuel is scarce and expensive,
Being poor in and of it's self is not a handicap.
A person who is poor at age 20,should have a grade school education, there are truant officers that are supposed to make sure ALL kids are in school, so going to school has nothing to do with being poor, a bus is provided by 90+% of school districts,free lunches are provided to those that need it. They should also have social security numbers,which means if they work they can be putting back for retirement, and a family that raised them.
Instead of doing NOTHING under a bridge all day, why not walk the neighbor hood and pick up the trash laying on the ground and put it in cans? Why not help the elderly lady mow her lawn instead of walking by laughing because she slow?
Hell she might let you live in the shed out back if you keep the yard mowed. You have to start Somewhere, and getting government hand outs is a temporary thing at best.
Life style choices maby? Get paid on friday, party all weekend and broke again on monday? It is not all the employers fault people don't live well.
My nephew studied Dutch literature. There are much less people speaking Dutch in the world, than there are people speaking English, so does that sound like a smart move to you?
Last I heard, he was doing pretty well for himself. I don't hear much, because I don't connect much with that side of the family, because they feel too good for us, but he made it possible for his parents to boast about him in their 'circles'.
Lots of people who pick educations like literature, economy or political philosophy end up filthy fucking rich. It all depends on the social circles you are in.
I'm sure he didn't go into debt $60,000 (or $600,000? 5 zeros?) either, because he studied in The Netherlands. His parents are teachers and are doing well, but it's not like they could afford to send him to Oxford, Harvard or Princeton.
But still, that's your explanation for why your country has so many more people in financial uncertainty? Because they pick the wrong education? Are Dutch people just smarter at picking an education or maximizing their living standard on the education they picked?
Try again;
Why do 56% of Americans struggle to pay a $1000 bill,
while only 19% of Dutch people struggle to pay a $3000 bill?
Is it maybe that we get exploited by employers less?
Maybe because we don't give all power away to billionaires?
Because we actually still have something left of democracy?
Why work hard when all you want is a video game,a dirty couch and some micky d's 24-7?
Why is poverty ALLWAYS been a issue? The chain of events has to break at some point for a change to happen.Little Johnny or little Tyron have to wake up 1 morning and think to themselves, "I am sick of this fucking dump I live in,I am sick of not having a car,I am sick of ---fill in the blank". And take action.
only registered users can see external links
It is time for the world to understand the experiment failed and people will actually have to Do something on their own like go the already provided 1-12 and get educated and start working!
I'm the one living in a socialist utopia, remember? Not you.
Compared to the US, our cuddling of the unemployed is like heavy petting.
It's not a rich life, but they can have a roof, a cough, food and a PlayStation.
No need to work, but still most of the time our unemployment rate is lower.
So that cannot be it. Try again.
I think you meant couch, not cough. I have that and a clogged head right now from allergies turned into sinus infection. UG.
Allergies are annoying. I'm on Cetirizine most of the year.
When I worked in a cleanroom for 10 years, I liked going to work.
Pure air at a constant 70° F, while outside pollen would get me in minutes.
If it becomes worse, I'll get an air purifier.
How could I see if your government subsidized poor people, by flying over
and driving around? Wouldn't I see many homeless?
Many of them have a cough instead of a couch.
Wouldn't I see lots of decrepit neighborhoods? As I understand, you're government thinks that poor people don't need clean tapwater, decent roads, streetlights, trees and safe power-connections. Only rich people, right?
That sounds like subsidizing rich people to me.
In my country, also poor people have clean tapwater, decent roads, streetlights, trees and safe power-connections.
Or would I see 3.6% of the population just sitting on their couch, playing video games? If they are, the chance that it's their own home and own couch is very low. That's not the government subsidizing them, that's their family subsidizing them.
only registered users can see external links
This 1 is close ,the 1 I remember was more humorous.
The reason I compare what you are talking about to this meme is when a news crew for a liberal tv channel is trying to prove a point they will select a SMALL area to focus on with a wide angle lens.
Same with all the rest,
If you were to rent you a Charger and drive along the rural roads of many states you would see homes with mowed lawns,happy kids playing in the front yard, a gun target in the back, you would see gated neighborhoods filled with snobs that wouldn't give you air out of a jug.
Then you would see farmers working the fields. real life.
And NO cameras, because those things don't help with any current agenda
There is some truth to the liberal media doing that from time to time.
But if it's the 'Same with all the rest', why are you only talking about the liberal media doing that?
The right-wing media has a strategy that is similar, but even less honest; to prove a big, general point, they focus on a SMALL area with a microscope and then claim everything outside that view is the same.
But that's why I don't just believe what any media company says. First, I think critically if the claims are presented with evidence that confirm the claims. Second, I think critically if those claims and evidence are consistent with facts that I know are true and claims and evidence that I found to be correct previously. If there is anything new or profound about some claim (presented with evidence), then I further investigate the claim. If not, then not. I'm not wasting any time to think about claims presented without any evidence. I just reject those. I also don't spend much time on claims presented with evidence, that are not new or profound. They don't add anything. I'm only spending any time on claims that are presented with evidence, which might be in conflict with facts that I know are true and claims and evidence that I found to be correct previously.
Third, I check claims and evidence that might contain something new for me to learn. Claims can be incorrectly supported by evidence, by using fallacies. Evidence can be faked. There could be other evidence contradicting it. That requires investigation of sources, and related evidence of related claims. Often the claims turn out to be false, because of fallacies, or too small of a focus, or falsified evidence. Sometimes it only takes a few minutes to confirm or reject a claim or evidence.
I'm sure I would see all the things that you are saying. I would see the same things, if I would rent a Toyota Corolla Hybrid, but would save a lot of fuel.
However, how would that driving around and seeing that increase my understanding about people being encouraged not to work by government subsidizing?
I won't see any cameras or aren't I allowed to bring cameras?
Cameras could definitely help with an agenda. How about an agenda of state surveillance of its people? Add facial recognition software and the state knows where you are and what you're doing at any time. If they still need it, because most people carry a surveillance device around in their pocket. They want to know anything about you and then tell you that it doesn't matter unless you are a 'bad' person. It all depends on how they define 'bad', don't you think?
Just driving around for days, I have no need for 345 cubic inches making lots of noise and stink and emptying my wallet, without some real fun in return.
Any modern car is way more comfortable for just cruising.
In the future that I see, cars like that are not for every day use, but for the museum and for thrashing around on the racetrack in the weekends, although then fueled with racing bio-ethanol.
Why limit yourself so?
Enjoy life!
And I won't wait until the bucket is getting close.
But anything like that costs over $400. I certainly have the money,
but it's not a very responsible thing to spend money on.
Maybe I should let my friend Frank talk me into it.
He has no problem spending lots of money on his indulgences.
2nd, Getting paid on friday, party all weekend and broke again on monday? That’s a life choice. A person works to be able to live as he wants.
3rd, No one blames employers for life choices, but, we can blame them for making life at the job a shitty experience or denying a pay increase.
And we are supposed to feel sorry for them and pay them more so they can buy MORE booze.? Fuck em if they are that stupid. I wish prohibition had worked out, if drug laws were enforced there would be alot less poverty.
Another thing,if the burger flippers sees the manager has a degree to make the money, maby that is the motivation needed to go to night school so they can be a manager.
Whatever motivation a person has to better themselves is always good.
You can get alcohol just as easy in my country. Drugs are way more available here, way less criminalized and way less enforced. It's not that my government subsidizes people being alcoholics and drugs addicts either, because there are way less alcoholics and drugs addicts in my country, vs your country.
So why is cannabis a cause for Americans making bad choices or poverty?
There is no better solution for drug use than legalize, tax and regulate.
It lowers addictions, drug deaths and crime and costs on the legal system
and it brings in tax revenue and creates jobs.
(I'm not talking about dangerous hard drugs, before you go off on that)
You lot keep pointing to things, that if they were causes for poverty,
poverty would be much worse in The Netherlands. But it isn't.
That means that the things you are pointing to, as being bad, are NOT.
I notice that there are people who, by luck or by work, become successful even though they had handicaps. Handicaps like starting life poor or, having a partial education. These people, to a person, think that government help, given to the poor, is a scam. Never mind that they work in a job that pays an obscenely low wage. These people believe the recipients of government help are lazy or low life.
People will start to believe anything, that they are told 24/7.
The question is; why are they telling that?
Several years ago a local man that operates a mobile petting z00 came by to have his pressure washer fixed. Turns out he had left at another shop for 3 months and they said it was unrepairable. Turns out the low oil shut off did it's job, I changed the oil,added the correct amount and put him back to running in 15 minutes for less than 20 bucks.
Anyway,while we were talking he was explaining how he could not keep help. at that time he was paying a 100 bucks a day cash for folks to come clean out stables, ride in the truck to the site for the petting z00 thing to take place,and simply feed the animals and pickup poop,ride back to the ranch,unload the animals,feed them and leave with a 100 bucks cash. He said people would come work 2 or 3 days and never come back.
He ask 1 guy that was polite enough to work a short notice,why?
The guy said, "Look, I can go dogfooding and make alot more money.". my neighbor said,"what the hell is dogfooding?"
It was explained that you go to the store,get a can of corn beef hash, and a can of cheap dog food. You dump out the dog food, clean the can, and put the corn beef hash in the can. Get a spoon and put on your worst clothes and go sit on the corner. as cars come up, take a bite, people see this and give you money. The guy said he had made as much as 400 a day.
So why work when you can sit and make more money.?
That wouldn't work in The Netherlands. We expect the government to make sure there are no people poor enough to need to beg. It also because we don't want to be confronted with poverty. If you ask Dutch people, most prefer to pay a bit more taxes over being forced to do charity. We would actually rather pay people to sit on their couch and game, instead of them bothering us on the streets and depressing us about the state of our country.
People who are begging or dogfooding are harmful to the country.
And they still cost money, because they are begging or dogfooding.
Even the most useless people need to eat and a place to sleep.
And I would like them to shower sometimes, so they don't stink up the neighborhood and spread diseases.
Instead of giving money to beggars or dogfooders, I rather give that money to a state that is more capable of spending that money on those beggars, than those beggars are themselves, for providing them the basic necessities of life and any rehab and mental care they need.
There is decades of results and statistics that shows, that most of those people then will clean up their lives and return to being beneficial to the country again.
That results in changing people from being harmful and costly for the country to people being beneficial and profitabele for the country.
That is good for them, but it is also good for me, living in that country.
For the ones that don't clean up, that's unfortunate, but at least they do not need to beg, steal or sell drugs anymore to provide their basic necessities of life, and thereby they are being less harmful to my country and myself.
Locking them up in prisons, is only making them even more expensive for my country and making it even harder for them to start doing something beneficial.
My ideas are just practical. It's just efficiency and harm reduction.
How is it wise to keep doing things that obviously don't work?
And I don't believe anything just because it's told to me.
First of all, there is no one telling me what I think.
Socialism doesn't favor the wealthy and powerful, so there is
no one with a money incentive to spread propaganda for it.
However all the wealthy want to be more wealthy, so they pay for propaganda to make you think cutting taxes for the wealthy
and not spending a dime on poor people is good for you.
That's why they pay Fox'News', OAN and 'News'Max to tell you 24/7.
Second, there are way less poor people in countries with progressive leadership and way more poor people in countries with capitalist, conservative, right-wing leadership. And when former progressive countries turn more capitalist, conservative, right-wing, you always see the poor get poorer, lots of middle class people turn into poor people and the rich get richer.
But, why would you care, right? The poor are just lazy low-lives, ...until it's you....
Then YOU are just unlucky... But, ALL the OTHERS are STILL just lazy low-lives.
New Comment Go to top