Why?
AOC - can she get any dumber
- Thread starter gwb-trading
- Start date
Why?
Hey Tree...
Since I'm so good at "derailing posts" according to some here...
I have a question to you, B1, and a few others.
If Trumpy doesn't run in '24, who would you like to see run?
This goes out to B1 especially, because if he's anything, he's opinionated.
Would Pompeo be worthy of your vote?
Cotton? Cruz?
I know Pence is out of the conversation, or I'd think he was. I know he's conservative af, and I realize he was "only" the VP, but he sure seems to have the personality of one of those wax statues you see over in Myrtle Beach. I could be wrong on that though. He did win the governorship in Indiana so he must have at least a little charisma.
Anyway... who would you like to see run in the absence of Trump?
Mike Lee of Utah for prez. Tim Scott of SC for vp.
Note that you asked who I would like to see run. I did not say who I think will run. Both the dems and the pubs, however will go with the lowest common denominator as usual- whatever the 2024 version of that is.
Hey Tree...
Since I'm so good at "derailing posts" according to some here...
I have a question to you, B1, and a few others.
If Trumpy doesn't run in '24, who would you like to see run?
This goes out to B1 especially, because if he's anything, he's opinionated.
Would Pompeo be worthy of your vote?
Cotton? Cruz?
I know Pence is out of the conversation, or I'd think he was. I know he's conservative af, and I realize he was "only" the VP, but he sure seems to have the personality of one of those wax statues you see over in Myrtle Beach. I could be wrong on that though. He did win the governorship in Indiana so he must have at least a little charisma.
Anyway... who would you like to see run in the absence of Trump?
the fact that you mentioned Cruz makes me question your judgement...
I was just throwing the out names that came to mind. I'm sure he'll be in the mix.
$8,000 in 1970 is worth $57,308.87 today
So, not as bad as first appears. What gets me is these stories of people making payments and their balances go up.
PJ Rivera of Texas is one of the borrowers not prepared to resume student loan payments. His initial student debt was about $80,000, but has increased with interest to $110,000, even though he makes payments of $1,000 a month.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/09/us-student-loan-crisis-payments
So, not as bad as first appears. What gets me is these stories of people making payments and their balances go up.
PJ Rivera of Texas is one of the borrowers not prepared to resume student loan payments. His initial student debt was about $80,000, but has increased with interest to $110,000, even though he makes payments of $1,000 a month.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/09/us-student-loan-crisis-payments
To teach fiscal responsibility.
Here we go again.
Until a year or so ago, in NJ we would suspend your driver’s license for reasons ranging from failure to pay child support or show up for a Jay walking ticket. The idea was to penalize people with license suspensions to teach them responsibilities. It became so that over 90% of license suspensions were not related to moving violations. And as it turned out suspending people’s licenses was counterproductive because it would lead to more penalties such as driving while suspended and have other consequences like loss of a job which ironically led to people not being able to pay fines etc.
Turns out the scheme was stupid and became a money squeeze on poor people and people in difficult circumstances. No one benefitted.
The point is sometimes we think we are teaching people responsibility when we’re not and we just harming people.
"War on drugs", contraceptives, abortion, and bail system comes to mind
Yeah, everything you said is true. Most states still do this, but what if there were no laws like this at all? Do you think dirt-balls would all the sudden pay their child support? No. So you have to do something.
I don't have a solution. No one does.
The court system is one giant insatiable machine and the only ones that win are the lawyers.
The stuff you wrote, it's only gonna get worse too. One of the stocks I follow keeps getting more and more contracts with cities across the nation. They provide software that ties into existing traffic and public safety cameras and their database has access to literally everything including all DMV, insurance companies, and the nationwide bench warrant system. In a nutshell, imagine a traffic stop where everything about you is checked, even the vin # and color of the car. Now imagine the depth of that traffic stop being conducted real-time at every intersection you drive thru by AI. Their system's even pick up erratic driving and although they don't talk about it, I'm sure they're using facial recognition where the various cameras permit.
The minute their system flags anything, even an expired insurance policy or a tag that doesn't match the car, that information is sent to nearby LE and it's game over for that driver. Every week this company does a press release heralding some new city that signed up. It's the way things are now I guess, you either play by the rules or you feed that insatiable pig, and yes it does ruin more lives by placing folks in deeper and deeper holes that they'll never get out of. I've seen plenty.
Yes. This approach to American policy is directly from Calvinism. The concept that the poor and misfortunate were out of favor with the divinity. Thus poverty is treated as a crime in America, ie punish the poor for the circumstances of poverty.
* I should add that modern Calvinism dejected this philosophy some time ago and does not support a punitive approach to poverty however this is the legacy of a large amount of our legal system.