Let's have a look at how those rich bastards are ripping us all off. We have basically 3 types of taxes in this country, income tax, sales tax and property tax. For argument's sake let's say I make 80k$/year. To the Feds I paid about 15% or so in income tax, 12k$. If some rich dude made 10M$ he paid the highest tax bracket, I think its around 30% so he or she paid 3M$. That's about 25x what I paid. That's infinitely more than somebody at the poverty level who likely paid 0$. That's totally unfair though somehow.
Example of sales tax - I buy a Ford Focus for 15k$, sales tax in Michigan is 6% so I pay $900 in sales tax. The rich person could buy a Focus too and be even with me but likely not. They'll probably buy a souped up or loaded vehicle for at least 100k$ and pay 6k$ in taxes. That's 6x what I paid. Totally not paying their fair share.
How about property tax. I pay about $3000/year on a house worth about 150k$. I doubt that rich person owns a house like mine. If their house is worth 1.5M$ they're paying 30k$/year. Again, boy do I feel like they're taking me for a ride.
Let's also keep in mind that we don't have a wealth tax in this country. If Bill Gates decided to bury all of his money in his backyard, ditched all his vehicles and property other than a home in Tennessee or Florida where there's no property tax, and lived off what he grew in his garden, he would pay zip, zero, nada in taxes!
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
Let's have a look at how those rich bastards are ripping us all off. We have basically 3 types of taxes in this country, income tax, sales tax and property tax. For argument's sake let's say I make 80k$/year. To the Feds I paid about 15% or so in income tax, 12k$. If some rich dude made 10M$ he paid the highest tax bracket, I think its around 30% so he or she paid 3M$. That's about 25x what I paid. That's infinitely more than somebody at the poverty level who likely paid 0$. That's totally unfair though somehow.
Example of sales tax - I buy a Ford Focus for 15k$, sales tax in Michigan is 6% so I pay $900 in sales tax. The rich person could buy a Focus too and be even with me but likely not. They'll probably buy a souped up or loaded vehicle for at least 100k$ and pay 6k$ in taxes. That's 6x what I paid. Totally not paying their fair share.
How about property tax. I pay about $3000/year on a house worth about 150k$. I doubt that rich person owns a house like mine. If their house is worth 1.5M$ they're paying 30k$/year. Again, boy do I feel like they're taking me for a ride.
Let's also keep in mind that we don't have a wealth tax in this country. If Bill Gates decided to bury all of his money in his backyard, ditched all his vehicles and property other than a home in Tennessee or Florida where there's no property tax, and lived off what he grew in his garden, he would pay zip, zero, nada in taxes!
Someone living below the poverty level did not pay zero. Payroll taxes (which is what MOST people pay) likely ended up being as high a percentage of their income as the millionaire. There are not 3 types of taxes in this country, there are 4. And the 4th one is unavoidable.
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
Yeah, I'm sure this is the whole story. The kid wasn't belligerent at all. Even him saying 'somebody's going to get hurt' was pretty stupid. You'd better find a better video than that to convince me...
Let's have a look at how those rich bastards are ripping us all off. We have basically 3 types of taxes in this country, income tax, sales tax and property tax. For argument's sake let's say I make 80k$/year. To the Feds I paid about 15% or so in income tax, 12k$. If some rich dude made 10M$ he paid the highest tax bracket, I think its around 30% so he or she paid 3M$. That's about 25x what I paid. That's infinitely more than somebody at the poverty level who likely paid 0$. That's totally unfair though somehow.
Example of sales tax - I buy a Ford Focus for 15k$, sales tax in Michigan is 6% so I pay $900 in sales tax. The rich person could buy a Focus too and be even with me but likely not. They'll probably buy a souped up or loaded vehicle for at least 100k$ and pay 6k$ in taxes. That's 6x what I paid. Totally not paying their fair share.
How about property tax. I pay about $3000/year on a house worth about 150k$. I doubt that rich person owns a house like mine. If their house is worth 1.5M$ they're paying 30k$/year. Again, boy do I feel like they're taking me for a ride.
Let's also keep in mind that we don't have a wealth tax in this country. If Bill Gates decided to bury all of his money in his backyard, ditched all his vehicles and property other than a home in Tennessee or Florida where there's no property tax, and lived off what he grew in his garden, he would pay zip, zero, nada in taxes!
Some issues here. The inheritance tax is what is supposed to redistribute your 'bill gates burying money' scenario, but republicans shockingly are against it and do away with it whenever they can.
If your rich guy made 10M a year, he is not paying 3M in taxes and (he's probably not making 10M a year). He certainly has money in investments - stocks, houses, trusts, commodities whatever, not only 10M salary. He'll be able to afford to pay people to exploit loopholes and hide his money. He probably pays less tax as a percentage than you. For example, the one page of the tax return we had showed Trump could legally pay 0 taxes for years.
And if you are paying 100k for a car on a lark, you can easily afford 6k tax it's nothing to you. While if you are barely buying your low price Focus any extra costs are going to hurt because you don't have 60 million in the bank.
Higher-income taxpayers who enjoy low tax rates receive a very high proportion of their income from investment income, which is taxed at low rates, the report says. Conversely, lower-income taxpayers who face relatively high tax rates get most of their income from wages, which are subject to payroll taxes.
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
Yeah, I'm sure this is the whole story. The kid wasn't belligerent at all. Even him saying 'somebody's going to get hurt' was pretty stupid. You'd better find a better video than that to convince me...
Being belligerent to a cop isn't a crime. The problem is that many cops think it is. The worst crime, in their eyes, is anyone questioning their total authority.
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
Yeah, I'm sure this is the whole story. The kid wasn't belligerent at all. Even him saying 'somebody's going to get hurt' was pretty stupid. You'd better find a better video than that to convince me...
Ok... then answer these question:
What offense was the officer going to arrest the kid for?
If there is no offense, why did the officer remove his handcuffs from his belt?
The officer said "why don't you cooperate?" how was the kid (who answered all the questions prior to the handcuffs being removed) not cooperating with the officer?
Yes, the officer might have been dispatched to the scene of the kids working due to a citizen's tip. However, the kids explained their actions (maybe not in the best ways - but all was explained) to the responding officer. The officer exhibited unprofessional behaviour himself when he attempted to dominate the discussion by placing the kid in handcuffs. This event was escalated by the officer when he would not provide his own name. That was all that was required of the officer.
What would you have reasonable people, do? Keep giving them more? No. We've compromised, we've engaged in give and take in good faith. They have absolutely not.
I would have reasonable people act reasonably. I think everyone acknowledges that there are good reasons for the Site Rules on this Forum that prohibit personal attacks - doing this only hardens positions and escalates any disagreements. The same applies in politics. Attacking the other side personally, even if you disagree with their policies, will help no-one. {Edit: there may be a short-term gain in relation to winning elections, but I think everyone loses in the longer term}
Whether you agree with their policies or not (and I rarely do), there are legitimate areas of concern underlying the Republican philosophy. For instance: - the US has had a consistent tendency to overspend budget for many years. That's not simply a domestic problem, it also encourages distortions to international trade (such as the currency manipulation that Trump has accused China of). - the US government has not always behaved well. I'm not in touch with domestic issues, but the amount of 'dirty tricks' campaigns carried out abroad over the years is evidence that historically the US government's not always acted benevolently. I don't find it surprising that some people are concerned about giving the state too much power. - one strand of economic theory states that an unfettered market will find optimal solutions for the country as a whole. Linked to that is the theory of the 'trickle-down effect' that promoting wealth for the rich will eventually help everyone. While those pure market theories are less popular than they were they remain influential and it's not surprising therefore that some politicians believe the best way to help the poor is to help the rich.
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
This officer was completely out of line. The young man in question stated that he did not have an id on him (which is reasonable when your job is lawncare) but did state his full name and date of birth, which meant that he complied with the officer's requests.
Technically, a police officer can arrest you at any time citing "on suspicion of having committed crime x" and at that point you have no choice but to comply unless you want them to add the extra charge of "resisting arrest" onto the incident report. That is not how the criminal justice system at the street level is supposed to work but that is how it does work so we have to deal with reality as it exists, not as we would like it to exist. After you are released from jail, where presumably they released you because they figured out that you weren't actually doing anything suspicious or illegal, you can then sue for wrongful arrest...but that may not be a fight you can win even if the truth is on your side.
*************
The Democrat Party has released its Better Deal policy statement. It doesn't contain anything of real substance, in and of itself, but then this one-page document is not the party's official platform statement, either, only an outline of what their general platform will be going into the 2018 campaign season.
My advice to Democrats is that now is the time to quit bashing Trump, making your statements sound negative, and start focusing on presenting the positive message of how things could improve if they were able to steer the country in a different direction. The thing working in the Democrats' favor right now is, ironically, Trump himself--his "I am going to do things my way whether you like it or not" attitude, combined with his inability to filter himself before he speaks or tweets, makes even other Republicans roll their eyes and hope they will be able to nominate someone else in 2020.
The Libertarian Party is also getting a boost from Trump lately as some Republicans--not many, but some--are looking for a new political home.
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
Yeah, I'm sure this is the whole story. The kid wasn't belligerent at all. Even him saying 'somebody's going to get hurt' was pretty stupid. You'd better find a better video than that to convince me...
Being belligerent to a cop isn't a crime. The problem is that many cops think it is. The worst crime, in their eyes, is anyone questioning their total authority.
Granted, but it isn't very smart either. I had a friend who when pulled over for speeding, started an argument with the cop. If I hadn't been there to calm the situation down, the cop was going to haul him off to jail. On a Sunday which would have meant a night's stay. My friend was white and lucky he wasn't by himself...
Does the email suggest that a preference for jobs was being shown to people of a particular religion - yes. Is that preference in itself a problem - no.
white christian men they are already over-represented in the public sector and there would thus be no basis for showing them a preference on the grounds of reflecting the community
Equal representation is not an argument for the denial of civil rights. There is no reason to believe everything should be virtually in line with the demographics of the wider society in the first place. People make different choices.
This whole line of thinking (equal representation must be achieved even if we comprimise equal rights) brings us around to the topic of intersectional social justice. Oooh boy.
I have very little good to say about it. The racial/sexual/religious/minority grievance industry has become so strong and radical that the legal pillars of a free society such as THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT are now so much garbage to the left.
Honestly, it's no wonder the white working class are fleeing the Democrats en masse when they want to make their life exponentially harder by making their very race, religion, and identity something that holds them back in life as every possible minority group gets special treatment after special treatment. Like "No Whites Day" at Evergreen College. This is where we're heading for the noble cause of social justice.
As an aside, there was no reference to reflecting the community in the piece or anything close, but i'm assuming that was indeed the motive for the sake of argument here. In my opinion, giving the left wing voting coalition special priveleges will give incentive to vote more and that is all the incentive the left needs to do so and to perpetuate this noxious social justice ideology in my view.
Yeah, no one has it worse than us white men. I can't tell you how hard it's made things for me being white, straight and male. I don't even know how I get by day to day, the way society does everything it can to hold me down, it's suffocating.
This harping over social justice boils down to this: when groups of people who have historically been denied rights start to attain them, those who have always had those rights view it as oppression, because they are no longer superior in society by default. And they fear that if these minority groups ever gain power, they will be treated the same way. This is THE main reason Trump was elected in the wake of Obama. By the way, you know what the opppsite of social justice is?? Social injustice.
Yeah, no one has it worse than us white men. I can't tell you how hard it's made things for me being white, straight and male. I don't even know how I get by day to day, the way society does everything it can to hold me down, it's suffocating.
This harping over social justice boils down to this: when groups of people who have historically been denied rights start to attain them, those who have always had those rights view it as oppression, because they are no longer superior in society by default. And they fear that if these minority groups ever gain power, they will be treated the same way. This is THE main reason Trump was elected in the wake of Obama. By the way, you know what the opppsite of social justice is?? Social injustice.
I love how this comment doesn't even engage with concerns raised in the post it is supposedly replying to.
Yeah, no one has it worse than us white men. I can't tell you how hard it's made things for me being white, straight and male. I don't even know how I get by day to day, the way society does everything it can to hold me down, it's suffocating.
This harping over social justice boils down to this: when groups of people who have historically been denied rights start to attain them, those who have always had those rights view it as oppression, because they are no longer superior in society by default. And they fear that if these minority groups ever gain power, they will be treated the same way. This is THE main reason Trump was elected in the wake of Obama. By the way, you know what the opppsite of social justice is?? Social injustice.
I love how this comment doesn't even engage with concerns raised in the post it is supposedly replying to.
The post I was responding to mentioned social justice as a pejorative about 3 or 4 times and also dealt with the idea that the white working class feels like minorities are getting special treatment. I'm not sure how my repsonse doesn't engage those topics.
And as long as we're on the topic, today, transgender Americans did receive "special treatment". Despite the fact that roughly 9000 of them are on active duty, Donald Trump just barred them from serving in the military. Special treatment indeed.
I agree that transgender decision is shocking. The bit of the tweets about the cost seems to be a red herring - there is a legitimate issue about what policy should be on health coverage, but that's not a basis for an outright ban. This feels more like a backlash from those that were never comfortable about allowing gays in the military and have seized their chance to recover a bit of lost ground - or perhaps it's just an extension of the obsession about which bathroom people should use ...
I agree that transgender decision is shocking. The bit of the tweets about the cost seems to be a red herring - there is a legitimate issue about what policy should be on health coverage, but that's not a basis for an outright ban. This feels more like a backlash from those that were never comfortable about allowing gays in the military and have seized their chance to recover a bit of lost ground - or perhaps it's just an extension of the obsession about which bathroom people should use ...
Does the email suggest that a preference for jobs was being shown to people of a particular religion - yes. Is that preference in itself a problem - no.
white christian men they are already over-represented in the public sector and there would thus be no basis for showing them a preference on the grounds of reflecting the community
Equal representation is not an argument for the denial of civil rights. There is no reason to believe everything should be virtually in line with the demographics of the wider society in the first place. People make different choices.
This whole line of thinking (equal representation must be achieved even if we comprimise equal rights) brings us around to the topic of intersectional social justice. Oooh boy.
I have very little good to say about it. The racial/sexual/religious/minority grievance industry has become so strong and radical that the legal pillars of a free society such as THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT are now so much garbage to the left.
Honestly, it's no wonder the white working class are fleeing the Democrats en masse when they want to make their life exponentially harder by making their very race, religion, and identity something that holds them back in life as every possible minority group gets special treatment after special treatment. Like "No Whites Day" at Evergreen College. This is where we're heading for the noble cause of social justice.
As an aside, there was no reference to reflecting the community in the piece or anything close, but i'm assuming that was indeed the motive for the sake of argument here. In my opinion, giving the left wing voting coalition special priveleges will give incentive to vote more and that is all the incentive the left needs to do so and to perpetuate this noxious social justice ideology in my view.
So, I would be able to agree with this assessment if anyone hired by this process did not do a satisfactory job as I stated previously.
I would also agree with this assessment if the email was about posted positions in which people have to apply for instead of positions that are being appointed by the government, equal rights might be infringed, however that isn't the case.
The government can appoint anyone they like. At least with Obama, he appointed people qualified for the job unlike Bush, who had disastrous results by appointing friends and campaign donors (hurricane Katrina) and Trump who really hasn't appointed anyone.
And they fear that if these minority groups ever gain power, they will be treated the same way.
Which throughout history is exactly what happens, more often than not. Not exactly an unjustified fear.
In most countries, yes, but not so much here. Jefferson and many other Founding Fathers were convinced that freeing the slaves would result in a genocidal race war of vengeance if they freed slaves were not shipped back to Africa en masse. But in the end, contrary to their worst fears, American blacks never exacted vengeance for slavery.
I'd hesitate to draw a line from Jefferson's fears to a 21st-century white person's concerns about BLM and other race issues--that seems really harsh--but if people are worried that white people are going to end up getting oppressed, I think those fears are just as misguided as Jefferson's. So far, racial progress has only made all of us better off.
Besides, by the time whites become a minority in the United States, racism will probably have already vanished from living memory--and resentment only lives as long as the people who feel victimized. After all, BLM itself is complaining about present-day issues like police violence--not about long-since-abolished segregation or slavery. People have been dreading an anti-white backlash for 250 years, and it's never come.
I'm not afraid of resentment. When racism finally dies--whether it takes another 10 years or 20 or 50 or 100--resentment will die with it.
That being said, I have to agree with @WarChiefZeke about the nature of the debate today. Hurling around anti-white rhetoric has become irritatingly fashionable in academia and some circles online, and I fail to see the profit in silly games like "No Whites Day" or the occasional white people joke. The white working class isn't fleeing the Democratic party--they've already been a conservative-leaning group for the last several decades--but there's an attitude among certain liberals that anti-racism means anti-white, and that attitude is definitely turning people off. In their minds, white people aren't allies to be won; they're enemies to be defeated or "shut down." Their opinions are ignorant by default; they're all blinded by privilege; they fear equality because "equality feels like oppression to people who have all the advantages." It's the perfect way to dismiss a white person's opinion out of hand, and with few exceptions, that's what these arguments are used for--not to enlighten, but to discredit.
And if a white person does experience discrimination, the response isn't always "Yeah, I've had to deal with that crap, too." Sometimes it's "It doesn't count if you're white" or "Ha! Now YOU know how it feels!"
Somehow, this message fails to resonate with white people.
Personally, I think my life has been at least a little easier because I'm white. I actually sympathize with the minority/leftist side in almost every policy debate involving race. And I know that even the worst kind of anti-white sentiment isn't going to get me assaulted or killed or discriminated against in the job market or whatever.
It's just the rhetoric that bothers me. When I hear somebody going off about white people, I don't feel like an ally anymore.
The more I think about this transgender ban, the worse it gets. This isn't like don't ask/don't tell, where a gay person could possibly still hold their rank if they went to great lengths to hide their identity. Trump just flat-out banned an entire group of people. So now what?? Do we root out the 9000 or so serving honorably right now?? This is a massive spit in the eye to the thousands upon thousands of transgender troops who have served in our military. And he did it all to appeal to his political base. Donald Trump is a monster. And I NEVER will stand for listening to a Republican or Trump supporter talking about "supporting the troops" again. Ever. That ship has sailed forever.
Devil's Advocate point: do you really, honestly believe either party gives a rats ass about the army? Neither seems to offer any serious support to vets for example.
Devil's Advocate point: do you really, honestly believe either party gives a rats ass about the army? Neither seems to offer any serious support to vets for example.
I know what party is responsible for telling a group of Americans they are less than everyone else today, that's for damn sure. But really, this is no shock. As we learned last year, a segment of the population can't even handle having transgender NPC in a video game, so it only stands to reason they can't tolerate them in broader society. As much as this move was for the social conservatives, it was also for the Gamergate brigade and those with cartoon frog avatars.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders just said she does not have an answer to what will happen to currently serving trans sevice members. The White House us referring questions to the DoD, and the DoD is referring questions to the White House. How in the everloving f**k can you announce something like this and have NO idea on how you are going to implement it??
I can see both sides to the topic. You want to be inclusive to everyone. But there are a million questions about how to implement it and what it's effects will be to the military. How will you define transgender? Will self identity alone be sufficient? Or will you be required some form of ongoing treatment? What are the side effects of that and how may it effect one on the battlefield?
The most important question surrounding transgender issues to me is that it is still legal in some states to give hormone changing drugs to prepubescent "transgender children".
To me, that's outright child abuse. Those are decisions an adult mind should be making.
I can see both sides to the topic. You want to be inclusive to everyone. But there are a million questions about how to implement it and what it's effects will be to the military. How will you define transgender? Will self identity alone be sufficient? Or will you be required some form of ongoing treatment? What are the side effects of that and how may it effect one on the battlefield?
The most important question surrounding transgender issues to me is that it is still legal in some states to give hormone changing drugs to prepubescent "transgender children".
To me, that's outright child abuse. Those are decisions an adult mind should be making.
I agree.
I think a proper compromise is that you are not allowed to transition during your time in service, but you are allowed to self identify.
Transitioning is allegedly a stressful, isolating time. This stress shouldnt be compounded with the stress of serving in a war zone.
If this is how it was announced, I think there would be less backlash against it, however, Trump doesn't have a filter so...
About the kids getting hormone changing drugs, I agree fully. Yes people are usually aware of what gender they relate to at a young age, however, outside pressure might confuse the kid if it is forceful enough.
Yeah, let's just ignore the fact that it's been working perfectly fine for years, and that Mattis was wholly opposed to this, and Trump did it when he was out of town. Try your argument on this person, see how it goes for you:
Comments
Example of sales tax - I buy a Ford Focus for 15k$, sales tax in Michigan is 6% so I pay $900 in sales tax. The rich person could buy a Focus too and be even with me but likely not. They'll probably buy a souped up or loaded vehicle for at least 100k$ and pay 6k$ in taxes. That's 6x what I paid. Totally not paying their fair share.
How about property tax. I pay about $3000/year on a house worth about 150k$. I doubt that rich person owns a house like mine. If their house is worth 1.5M$ they're paying 30k$/year. Again, boy do I feel like they're taking me for a ride.
Let's also keep in mind that we don't have a wealth tax in this country. If Bill Gates decided to bury all of his money in his backyard, ditched all his vehicles and property other than a home in Tennessee or Florida where there's no property tax, and lived off what he grew in his garden, he would pay zip, zero, nada in taxes!
A kid is mowing grass and putting business cards on people's houses.
Look at this shady cop in this video. In the context of black men getting shot by police under suspicious circumstances, this cop's behavior must have been terrifying. This policeman came by the kids house later and sicced his police dog on him too.
edit:
longer video here but can't embed.
https://www.facebook.com/beyondtheindustry/videos/1257211057722247/?autoplay_reason=gatekeeper&video_container_type=0
youtube version ->
If your rich guy made 10M a year, he is not paying 3M in taxes and (he's probably not making 10M a year). He certainly has money in investments - stocks, houses, trusts, commodities whatever, not only 10M salary. He'll be able to afford to pay people to exploit loopholes and hide his money. He probably pays less tax as a percentage than you. For example, the one page of the tax return we had showed Trump could legally pay 0 taxes for years.
And if you are paying 100k for a car on a lark, you can easily afford 6k tax it's nothing to you. While if you are barely buying your low price Focus any extra costs are going to hurt because you don't have 60 million in the bank.
Higher-income taxpayers who enjoy low tax rates receive a very high proportion of their income from investment income, which is taxed at low rates, the report says. Conversely, lower-income taxpayers who face relatively high tax rates get most of their income from wages, which are subject to payroll taxes.
What offense was the officer going to arrest the kid for?
If there is no offense, why did the officer remove his handcuffs from his belt?
The officer said "why don't you cooperate?" how was the kid (who answered all the questions prior to the handcuffs being removed) not cooperating with the officer?
Yes, the officer might have been dispatched to the scene of the kids working due to a citizen's tip. However, the kids explained their actions (maybe not in the best ways - but all was explained) to the responding officer. The officer exhibited unprofessional behaviour himself when he attempted to dominate the discussion by placing the kid in handcuffs. This event was escalated by the officer when he would not provide his own name. That was all that was required of the officer.
This lady explains it better than I do
Whether you agree with their policies or not (and I rarely do), there are legitimate areas of concern underlying the Republican philosophy. For instance:
- the US has had a consistent tendency to overspend budget for many years. That's not simply a domestic problem, it also encourages distortions to international trade (such as the currency manipulation that Trump has accused China of).
- the US government has not always behaved well. I'm not in touch with domestic issues, but the amount of 'dirty tricks' campaigns carried out abroad over the years is evidence that historically the US government's not always acted benevolently. I don't find it surprising that some people are concerned about giving the state too much power.
- one strand of economic theory states that an unfettered market will find optimal solutions for the country as a whole. Linked to that is the theory of the 'trickle-down effect' that promoting wealth for the rich will eventually help everyone. While those pure market theories are less popular than they were they remain influential and it's not surprising therefore that some politicians believe the best way to help the poor is to help the rich.
Technically, a police officer can arrest you at any time citing "on suspicion of having committed crime x" and at that point you have no choice but to comply unless you want them to add the extra charge of "resisting arrest" onto the incident report. That is not how the criminal justice system at the street level is supposed to work but that is how it does work so we have to deal with reality as it exists, not as we would like it to exist. After you are released from jail, where presumably they released you because they figured out that you weren't actually doing anything suspicious or illegal, you can then sue for wrongful arrest...but that may not be a fight you can win even if the truth is on your side.
*************
The Democrat Party has released its Better Deal policy statement. It doesn't contain anything of real substance, in and of itself, but then this one-page document is not the party's official platform statement, either, only an outline of what their general platform will be going into the 2018 campaign season.
My advice to Democrats is that now is the time to quit bashing Trump, making your statements sound negative, and start focusing on presenting the positive message of how things could improve if they were able to steer the country in a different direction. The thing working in the Democrats' favor right now is, ironically, Trump himself--his "I am going to do things my way whether you like it or not" attitude, combined with his inability to filter himself before he speaks or tweets, makes even other Republicans roll their eyes and hope they will be able to nominate someone else in 2020.
The Libertarian Party is also getting a boost from Trump lately as some Republicans--not many, but some--are looking for a new political home.
This morning:
This whole line of thinking (equal representation must be achieved even if we comprimise equal rights) brings us around to the topic of intersectional social justice. Oooh boy.
I have very little good to say about it. The racial/sexual/religious/minority grievance industry has become so strong and radical that the legal pillars of a free society such as THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT are now so much garbage to the left.
Honestly, it's no wonder the white working class are fleeing the Democrats en masse when they want to make their life exponentially harder by making their very race, religion, and identity something that holds them back in life as every possible minority group gets special treatment after special treatment. Like "No Whites Day" at Evergreen College. This is where we're heading for the noble cause of social justice.
As an aside, there was no reference to reflecting the community in the piece or anything close, but i'm assuming that was indeed the motive for the sake of argument here. In my opinion, giving the left wing voting coalition special priveleges will give incentive to vote more and that is all the incentive the left needs to do so and to perpetuate this noxious social justice ideology in my view.
This harping over social justice boils down to this: when groups of people who have historically been denied rights start to attain them, those who have always had those rights view it as oppression, because they are no longer superior in society by default. And they fear that if these minority groups ever gain power, they will be treated the same way. This is THE main reason Trump was elected in the wake of Obama. By the way, you know what the opppsite of social justice is?? Social injustice.
And as long as we're on the topic, today, transgender Americans did receive "special treatment". Despite the fact that roughly 9000 of them are on active duty, Donald Trump just barred them from serving in the military. Special treatment indeed.
Today, transgender soldiers became that enemy.
I would also agree with this assessment if the email was about posted positions in which people have to apply for instead of positions that are being appointed by the government, equal rights might be infringed, however that isn't the case.
The government can appoint anyone they like. At least with Obama, he appointed people qualified for the job unlike Bush, who had disastrous results by appointing friends and campaign donors (hurricane Katrina) and Trump who really hasn't appointed anyone.
Trump is engaging in a call to arms to cutural conservatives today. There is almost certainly some bad news coming shortly.
I'd hesitate to draw a line from Jefferson's fears to a 21st-century white person's concerns about BLM and other race issues--that seems really harsh--but if people are worried that white people are going to end up getting oppressed, I think those fears are just as misguided as Jefferson's. So far, racial progress has only made all of us better off.
Besides, by the time whites become a minority in the United States, racism will probably have already vanished from living memory--and resentment only lives as long as the people who feel victimized. After all, BLM itself is complaining about present-day issues like police violence--not about long-since-abolished segregation or slavery. People have been dreading an anti-white backlash for 250 years, and it's never come.
I'm not afraid of resentment. When racism finally dies--whether it takes another 10 years or 20 or 50 or 100--resentment will die with it.
That being said, I have to agree with @WarChiefZeke about the nature of the debate today. Hurling around anti-white rhetoric has become irritatingly fashionable in academia and some circles online, and I fail to see the profit in silly games like "No Whites Day" or the occasional white people joke.
The white working class isn't fleeing the Democratic party--they've already been a conservative-leaning group for the last several decades--but there's an attitude among certain liberals that anti-racism means anti-white, and that attitude is definitely turning people off. In their minds, white people aren't allies to be won; they're enemies to be defeated or "shut down." Their opinions are ignorant by default; they're all blinded by privilege; they fear equality because "equality feels like oppression to people who have all the advantages." It's the perfect way to dismiss a white person's opinion out of hand, and with few exceptions, that's what these arguments are used for--not to enlighten, but to discredit.
And if a white person does experience discrimination, the response isn't always "Yeah, I've had to deal with that crap, too." Sometimes it's "It doesn't count if you're white" or "Ha! Now YOU know how it feels!"
Somehow, this message fails to resonate with white people.
Personally, I think my life has been at least a little easier because I'm white. I actually sympathize with the minority/leftist side in almost every policy debate involving race. And I know that even the worst kind of anti-white sentiment isn't going to get me assaulted or killed or discriminated against in the job market or whatever.
It's just the rhetoric that bothers me. When I hear somebody going off about white people, I don't feel like an ally anymore.
Trump keeps attacking Jeff Sessions. Let me guess his master plan here:
1) Harass Jeff sessions. Hope he quits, if not fire him.
2) wait for Congress to take it's recess
3) appoint his boy as a recess appointment which doesn't require Congressional approval.
4)have his stooge fire or interfere and handicap Mueller.
4) profit as if a great weight was lifted
Sarah Huckabee Sanders just said she does not have an answer to what will happen to currently serving trans sevice members. The White House us referring questions to the DoD, and the DoD is referring questions to the White House. How in the everloving f**k can you announce something like this and have NO idea on how you are going to implement it??
The most important question surrounding transgender issues to me is that it is still legal in some states to give hormone changing drugs to prepubescent "transgender children".
To me, that's outright child abuse. Those are decisions an adult mind should be making.
I think a proper compromise is that you are not allowed to transition during your time in service, but you are allowed to self identify.
Transitioning is allegedly a stressful, isolating time. This stress shouldnt be compounded with the stress of serving in a war zone.
If this is how it was announced, I think there would be less backlash against it, however, Trump doesn't have a filter so...
About the kids getting hormone changing drugs, I agree fully. Yes people are usually aware of what gender they relate to at a young age, however, outside pressure might confuse the kid if it is forceful enough.
Let's face it, Americans worship the almighty dollar. God got kicked out of town about 30 years ago.