First, what are liberals going to do about it? This is a problem that was created by the rich, both Dems and Reps alike, over many years. If it's so bad, what's your plan?

Second, Dems already showed their plan, or lack thereof, back in W's term. I hope your party has more to offer. When W tried to privatize it so I can invest my money WAAAAAAAAY better than the government and get more back when I retire, Dems whined and cried like babies because personal responsibility goes against their party's ideology. I'm not bashing that, it's just opinion...Dems feel they need their entire lives controlled by the government and Reps don't. No reason to hate anyone. But, since all we have on here are DR lib kids who were not alive or just born when W was in office, let me tell you what happened. When W proposed it, he did it under the measure that SS was going to be insolvent by a certain year...I think it was 2035 or something like that. Now, one would think Dems would come back with an actual intelligent response and alternate plan. One would think they would accept the problem and try to find ways to fix it. But, alas, they didn't. What was their response? Their response consisted solely of one statement, "Nuh uh, it won't go insolvent until 2040"...again, I don't remember the actual years used but that is almost verbatim what a prominent Dem said.

If you can't connect the dots since liberals using logic doesn't ever happen, when Dems were informed of the research that said SS would be insolvent by 2035, their response wasn't to fix it but to just say that number is wrong...essentially agreeing that it will be insolvent but not the exact year the research said. They did not offer an alternate fix. They did not accept it as a problem that will plague Americans in the future. Their entire rebuttal consisted of just saying nuh uh.

It was a very sad day to watch in politics. But we do need change. We need drastic change in SS. If liberals can come up with a way to fix it without just ignoring it and kicking the can down the road like they did in early 2000s, I'm all ears.

Until then, their response back then is still one of the biggest stains on the Dem party to this day.

"I seem to recall housecats kill that many if not more?"

Ok, so the liberal measure is now "how much wildlife dies by non-humans" as their measure on whether something is a danger to nature. Guess what, a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE amount of wildlife dies in rainforests, WAAAAAAY more than humans kill...yet that doesn't stop liberals from whining about the lumber industry.

Once again, hypocrisy is the only platform liberals have.

"And the same is true for wage discrimination. Crap like this is why unions are so important. A union contract stops this nonsense - but it only works when enough people are represented by unions. And union membership is still FAR too low in the US."

Unfortunately for your side who wants unions, you do NOTHING to counter the negatives of unions. So, it's not a real solution any more than non-union ideologies. Both refuse to accept the negatives and find ways to make them less impactful or less negative. Instead, people spout how their ideology is the best thing ever since pockets and then get surprised when things don't really change even if you get what you want.

"I know little about this guy other than he brings the perspective of a new generation, and that's good..."

Nazis were a new generation at one time. Glad you give evidence that liberals blindly follow along with anything just because it's new and shiny.

Man, it feels great to channel my inner liberal and use Godwin's Law. It's been so long and it feels so refreshing.

Got it, so the reward for killing 1200 civilians and keeping many hostages, many of which who died under their watch, is to give them what they want. I mean, I completely understand France doing it since it tracks in their history to just give up but not most other countries.

The liberal mentality of giving up just doesn't sit right with me, especially when it concerns bullies regardless of their size or capabilities.

Yes, we already know, everything associated with Epstein and anybody who isn't a liberal is an immediate national emergency and the worst thing ever since the crucifixion, but anything having to do with Epstein and anyone leaning left is worth of covering up, ignoring, not saying a word, etc.

We get it already. Find a new show.

If any of you have problems with affording meat, join your local Meals on Wheels. Not sure how true it is everywhere but I haven't paid for meat in over a year. In fact, after Hurricane Milton and losing power, we lost a freezer full of meat and estimated it at around $1.1k loss which we recovered for free over the next month. All of it was free for MOW drivers since they give up any meat they can't use opposed to throwing it away. Sure, it's always either close to the expiration or already expired but put that in the freezer and it will last months.

As I've posted on here before, there is money out there for everyone, you just have to work for it. You have to make effort. Not buying meat helps us a bit but doesn't make us rich...but compounding that on top of other little hacks you can do makes a significant difference.

"Anyone that thought a billionaire was going to lower prices is a special kind of stupid."

Anyone who associates this with a billionaire and not a VEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERY long trend of ALL politicians not lowering prices is a special kind of stupid. Just wait 30 years or so when you are 40 and actually have the right perspective. Recency bias kills politics when kids think they know how things work.

"Has climate change changed the appeal of coastal Florida?"

No, because the actual impact of climate change isn't rising sea levels regardless what the liberal media tries to tell you. The sea levels aren't rising at any measurable significance if you read unbiased news and not doomsday liberals with an agenda or idiot cons who don't believe anything ever changes and if it does then it's bad. What IS causing problems are rising water tables due to erosion and other factors (e.g., infrastructure expansion to meet expanding population, etc.) Miami is going to be at the tipping point in the next 5-10 years most likely, if not sooner. And having 2 more hurricanes a year (Atlantic) since 1920 with average wind speeds just a tick higher due to climate change isn't even close to the top of the reasons why this is happening.

Reading and researching is a very good skill to have.

Yet, all of the people from communist/dictator countries who were able to make their way to the US, who get articles published in our media talking about how bad socialism and liberalism were to their country and freedoms, are completely ignore by lib kids. But one article comes with someone hating on the other side and you lib kids cling to it like hypocrisy is going out of style.

When Dems gerrymander, it's all good. When Reps do it, all of a sudden it's a terrible thing and the world is ending. Same thing with filibustering. Dems whine like babies every time Reps do it but then turn around and do it all the time.

With the incredibly apparent and undeniable hypocrisy on this site every day, I know I'm right that DR is filled with either just a bunch of kids or is just a bunch of bots like Reddit.

That's nothing. A self-described jihadist won the primary in New York. It's happening all over the place across both parties.

The reason why insurance has gotten stupid here is because of socialist mentalities. So many of you don't even understand and refuse to learn about it because you can't accept that maybe there are some negatives to socialism (there are positives too, of course).

Companies do charge higher rates by locality; however, not NEARLY enough to make up the difference. For example, a millionaire with a home on the beach may pay double in insurance but that house may be 5 times more likely to be destroyed in a hurricane. Add to that the fact that if you live 30 or more miles inland from the beach, the chances of damage requiring full house replacement go down draaaastically. Yet, people inland are forced to pay a much higher share than the risk they incur because the rich Dems and Reps have socialized the cost of insurance.

If the huge houses on the beaches of Florida actually paid even close to their risk level proportion of total damage, Florida home insurance would be much lower for everyone else.

I live 50ish miles inland from the nearest coast and, when I moved here from a place that is just 5 miles from the coast, I ended up paying over 80% of what I was paying for a larger home in an area that was about the same affluence (lack of affluence describes it better), which is how I know all of this. Put it this way, where I moved to was so much less populated that my auto insurance dropped by almost half. I went from a single dwelling house in a popular neighborhood near the coast to a townhouse in a small city that didn't even have a Starbucks when I moved here. Yet homeowner's barely declined. When I pushed the topic on the agencies I got quotes from, they all said the same thing that proportional costs are not part of home insurance in Florida.

Damn, GM hit hard by Reps this time. They got hit hard by Dems up to 2008 when they deregulated banks, thus requiring a bailout. I wonder if Trump is going to follow suit and provide bailout for his stupid decisions.

I know DR lib kids weren't alive in 2008 and won't accept anything bad that their party does but that doesn't make it any less true.

It's just normal Republican logic. Yes, this is going to benefit the rich incredibly and there is no hiding that at all. However, as usual it will help the average person but only if they know how to take advantage of it and can take the risk. In other words, very few average people (by proportion) will see any benefit to this.

What really shocks me about this decision though is the tax implications. I haven't read the full details yet but I want to know the estimates on tax income for the government. 401k gains are not taxed, so it will be like the IRA situation in which you can add in a certain amount to shield from taxes. Which means, sometime in the next 3 or so years we are going to see both parties trying really hard to increase that cap significantly in order to take advantage of more shielding. Which, again, really helps the average person who knows how to take advantage of it but not nearly as much as the rich.

So they are using this for the same exact reason Trump is yet liberals support the EU doing it. I'll spell it out for you so even a DR lib kid should be able to understand (not that it matters as all they will do is resort to name calling and demonizing because they can't deny it).

Trump saw that other countries were taking advantage of the US in trade deals, and have been for decades. So his plan is to modify them so that it makes more sense for America to produce what it can produce and only import what it needs that it can't make on its own or doesn't make sense to make on its own. If you read the article, that's exactly what EU is doing now. Now that the trade deals with the US aren't as lucrative and beneficial to them for the sake of the US, they are not looking at what they can produce and only import what they need that they can't make on their own or doesn't make sense to make on their own. And there is nothing wrong with this. But liberals still for some reason cling to the idea that they want other countries to take advantage of the hard work Americans have done for 250 years to become economic power we are today.

All it takes is like a little bit of reasoning skills. A little bit of critical thinking. It doesn't take much. But, the first step you have to take to EVER be able to recover from your problem, and it is a problem, is that you have to get rid of your partisan blinders and learn objectivity. Now, objectivity doesn't mean you have to agree with everything, all it means is you don't hold beliefs so ingrained in your psyche that you are incapable of seeing from other valid perspectives. So it's not attacking your ego, which is a liberal's food these days in politics.

Rofl, this is the exact opposite flex than liberals think it is, just proving again they have a big problem with logic.

If they didn't do anything, then there was no need for the violence and uproar. For all those days, all we heard as that they were forcefully removing people off the streets, breaking apart families, abducting anyone who had brown skin and shipping them away, etc....yet now liberals are saying they didn't do anything.

I'd be embarrassed if I were still a Dem. I mean, like incredibly embarrassed enough to not want to even show my face or anything to anyone who knew I was a liberal. The fact that liberals aren't is more telling than anything a Dem or Rep politician has done.

"Companies are likely to respond by building fewer of those projects, and those facilities that do come online will have bigger price tags, according to multiple estimates."

The "No duh" of this entire article is palpable. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT REPS WANT. This makes it more profitable for traditional sources of energy so investors will turn more to those.

Whether you like that or not is not this article's intent. It's actually trying to spread hate because of what Reps want to do. It is absolutely no different than saying the number of murders and rapes by immigrants will increase due to Dem policies. It is very true but it's not a surprise, Dems want open borders. No duh. Whether you like that or not is not the issue.

You could title this article "Reps staying balanced in their ideological approaches" and it still be true. They aren't doing anything different here. They are against green energy so want to make traditional energy more profitable. Dems don't like traditional energy so they do everything they can to make that more profitable.

No freaking duh.

Liberals, including all you DR kids, already laid the groundwork for how to respond to significantly increasing inflation (which this isn't but I'll pay your game). I'm just going to respond how liberals did during Biden's era since it was good enough for them and they can't hate me for it. This inflation is fake. It's misinformation. And, any of it that is real is only attributable to his predecessor. It's so obvious and anyone who disagrees with me is stupid.

God I love 21st century liberal logic and hypocrisy, it makes it so easy.

"And word on the Immigrant Detention Price Increase?
How much have we spent making people stay in camps and moving them from camp to camp before deporting them?"

Too easy. I can tell you with confidence that the cost of all of that is at or below the FWA that DOGE uncovered. Yet, liberals have been touting ever since that getting rid of FWA is actually bad for America. So, unfortunately, your idea can't be entertained. Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger. Blame Dems and all the DR lib kids on here for using that logic.

Oh ---- yeah! That would be awesome! When America's economy tanks artificially, it means my networth goes up significantly because I know how to invest and use my money. Also, artificial recessions have been the biggest boons to America's economy in the past more than any other type of recession/depression.

I know it's sexy to spread doom and gloom purely based on partisan hate and current events and I know that's all this is but, once someone gives up that kind of slave mentality, their eyes open to a whole new world of financial freedom.

Wow, you mean someone in one party is spreading negative opinions about foreign affairs about a POTUS that is in another party? I mean, I haven't ever seen that happen since every single day of Biden's term when Reps were doing it, every single day of Trump's first term when Dems were doing it, every single day of Obama's term when Reps were doing it, every single day of W's terms when Dems were doing it, every single day of Clinton's terms when Reps were doing it, every single day of Bush's term when Dems were doing it, every single day of Reagan's terms when Dems were doing it, and every single day of Carter's reign when Reps were doing it. Now, prior to 2000ish it wasn't every day but almost considering most of the time you had to read newspapers to see it. And I'm sure it happened every day prior to Carter but I was too young to really know.

But, this time it's true, right? This time it's worth saying, right?

It's really stupid to say Reps are tearing themselves apart or that this has any serious consequences on the party. That being said, it's crazy to see how much anxiety this has caused Reps over some stupid guy who both liberal AND conservative powerhouses shmoozed with.

"This is sickening. MAGA Nation is doing everything it can to rationalize the fact that they knowingly elected and then re-elected a------------."

It's also sickening that he isn't a rapist but whiney liberals are doing everything they can to deflect from the fact that many prominent Democrats were buddies with Epstein and travelled extensively with him and his girls. In other words, liberals don't want anyone to know that liberals were part of Epstein's circle just as much as cons.

See how easy it is to make stupid statements based on conjecture?

Based on how liberals have handled this war, we now know they want to continue to enable the war machine profits over actually trying to end wars. If liberals actually listened to what they said instead of just saying whatever it is that opposes the other political party, they would actually be objective enough to see this. Liberals praised Biden's sending of military supplies only AFTER Reps started trying to block them...before that, it was just a typical response and neither side really held any strong opinion.

Since Reps fought so strongly against sending aid (and not for the right reason, so don't get me wrong in thinking I'm supporting them), Dems couldn't just think critically and logically and determine the right response. Instead, they just immediately went to whatever the opposite was of Rep support.

Now that we have a long enough trend, it is every easy to logically conclude that liberals want corporations who manufacturer these supplies to continue to do so. Which is odd considering not that long ago and for decades prior, liberals fought against the rich getting richer and especially against how much the US's defense budget is (to spell it out for the DR lib kids, the budget is what includes the buying of military supplies). Yet, now they are all about being the world's supplier of military supplies which just enables the rich and enables the US war machine.

Trump comes along and wants to stop the actual problem, which is the war. Unfortunately, being the idiot he is, he of course did it in the most blowhardest way of any blowharding in history, but that doesn't mean he was wrong. Liberals may not agree but many others do agree that they would rather have the war stop, and in a peaceful manner. So Trump tried that route first, whereas Biden did not even make an attempt (and any effort he did make was squashed because while Trump may be a blowhard, Biden is a submissive who can't be taken seriously by any world leader). Yet, Trump trying to end the war peacefully was met with hate from Dems.

Go ahead and try to argue it all you want that anything I've said above isn't accurate and doesn't follow sound logic based on the empirical evidence publicly available to us all. It doesn't change the logical conclusion. You just have to be objective enough and take off your partisan blinders to actually understand.

A simple Google search tells us 2 things...

1. Immigrants are leaving their pets behind from wherever they come from.
2. Under Biden, pets being left at the border by immigrants was a serious problem, and immigrants KNEW they wouldn't be able to bring them in.

In other words, this is nothing new. And if you care so much about the pets, then you have yet ANOTHER reason to not be pro-immigration since the migrants are leaving their pets behind when they leave in the first place.

Wooooooooooooooow....so some of you actually think this is new behavior? This isn't even hidden. Countries are open about their lobbying. They all try to lobby to get the US to do something. This has been going on since the 1800s.

But, hey, put a partisan spin on it and liberals will believe anything. I mean, Iran lobbied hard to get Obama to cut them some slack and that ended up being a multi-billion dollar payment.