You don't see anything wrong with a billionaire writing checks like that.
--Eberly

I'm the only one here who actually think it's wrong.
--Eberly

These comment stem from significant emotional problems, unrelated to the topic at hand.

I'm the only one here who actually think it's wrong.
#92 | Posted by eberly

Don't sell yourself short.
You're probably the only one in the entire United States.

"The game is rigged in favor of the rich but we're okay with that when they are giving to democrats"
#89 | Posted by eberly

The game is rigged in favor of the rich. The game tends to work out better for most Americans when Democrats are in charge of the government, and worse when Republicans are in charge. And that's a trend we've seen with pretty much every administration for the past thirty years.

That's why you voted for Obama, Hillary, and Biden.

"You don't see anything wrong with a billionaire writing checks like that. It's all about who they give them to."

Wrong, and right.
It can be, and is, wrong that we let billionaires write checks for political campaigns.
But not all billionaires writing checks are making America worse.
And if we're going to have billionaires writing checks, then we're going to have billionaires writing checks whether you like it or not.

Even if you don't think we should have billionaires writing checks, you're still going to need to get billionaires to write checks to participate in the billionaires-writing-checks form of government we have evolved into, thanks to Citizens United.

What you need to do is find billionaires to right the good kind of checks, to offset the bad ones.

Any fourth grader playing Monopoly could figure this out, not sure why you think it's such a flex on the Democrats that they're forced to do the thing Republicans forced them to do.

You don't see anything wrong with a billionaire writing checks like that. It's all about who they give them to.
#88 | Posted by eberly

What are you talking about? Every Democrat thinks Citizens United and unlimited campaign spending is a bullshit idea. Republicans fought for these rules, and won, and now we get to play by them.

Obviously, you're saying Democrats, by not refusing a seat at the table of governance, must therefore agree with all the rules of the status quo, and thus have no grounds to govern on that particular topic.

And apparently you don't think that sounds dumb.
You don't think that sounds like a tired bored drunk guy who wonders why his kids don't call him on a Tuesday.

K shaped economy started fifty years ago: "Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households."

What we're seeing now is the multi generational knock-on effects of what happens when just the top 20% of households can build generational wealth.

We're three generations deep into that economy. I wasn't exactly born into it, but I was in diapers when that happened. People my age with kids, their kids are in high school and college now; some are grandparents.

And as the money-talkers love to say, most families with generational wealth will see it dissipated within three generations. And now, it's harder to even start building that wealth.

You get one shot at life. I'm not willing to give up modern living unless the private jet crowd does first.
#21 | Posted by visitor_

Setting aside that your entire "bargaining" shtick is just an excuse to not take accountability for how you choose to behave during your one shot at life --

What do you think you are being asked to give up?
Your precious drinking straws?
Your gas powered leaf blower?
You are a child who cries when mommy puts his toys back in the toy box.

That is a sad commentary on your one shot at life.

It's time to change your diaper.

Congress votes their own pay and benefits.
#15 | Posted by Bellringer

Congress could vote us benefits too.
They just don't.
That's "the system" MTG cashed in on.

"Yet another Republican cashing in on the system they want to deny for the working class."

I went back to school to have a shot at cashing in on "the system.". The system being our two tier economy, where the top 20% of earners get 80% of the income.

Difference between me and a Republican is I don't want to deny that for the working class. I want more going to the bottom 80%. That's what allowed parents and grandparents of modest means to accrue generational wealth. Republicans want to pull up the ladder behind them, when it comes to generational wealth. So if you're not rich from the start, it's harder and harder to get there. But if you are rich, your first $13.99 million of inheritance is tax free.

Did y'all see how Trump stole Mamdani's look for the cameras the next day?

"I was just following orders" is not an excuse.
#61 | Posted by donnerboy

The White House says the opposite.

And there isn't a Republican who will even comment on it.

Especially not a Republican Veretan.

And that really doesn't bother any of you.
It ACTUALLY bothers me.
#78 | Posted by eberly

Of course, if you really felt that way, you would never have become a Republican.

If it doesn't bother you enough to even align with the political party that isn't exacerbating it, then I don't believe it really bothers you.

I can show you. Poverty, you have chalked up to being something society can't do anything about. Here is you positioning our economic plight as an inevitable forgone conclusion. You started by blaming poverty on poor people wanting more, then you said those people will never change.

-The amount of 'want' is hurting people.
It's addressed in the 10 commandments. That's how long that's been going on.
#23 | Posted by eberly

-So people suddenly started making worse decisions under trump?
No, stupid people who don't understand money are always like that.
This is a never-ending cycle
#20 | Posted by eberly

Many here think they can have it both ways.
#81 | Posted by eberly

Who thinks that?

And what's wrong with thinking you can have it both ways, when the leader of your Republican party thinks he's entitled to have everything he wants?

"Approximately $2 billion in property damage."

What's a fair price for your society to pay, for cops to stop killing people like George Floyd?

Nothing.

You like it when cops kill people like George Floyd.

"More than 2 dozen people killed."

^
JeffJ is the GracieAmazed Chicago Weekend Negro Update on infinite repeat.

"More than 2 dozen people killed."

How many police got killed by protesters?
How many protesters got killed by police?

And if you are including Kyle's kills, were they all good kills, all people who needed killing, just as Kyle acted in self defense?

And if so, why are you saying more than two dozen people killed like it's a bad thing? You should want more Kyles killing more bad guys.

"Over 1500 police officers injured."

How many civilians injured by other civilians?
How many civilians injured by police officers?

-A teacher doesn't have the money to influence a corrupt president.
See, an outright admission this system doesn't bother you.
Only losing.
#79 | Posted by eberly

How is it not America's loss when teachers do not have any influence with the President?

Explain why that system shouldn't bother us.

Explain why that system doesn't bother you.

"Third unvaccinated Kentucky infant dies from whooping cough"

Womp womp.

teachers, machinists, farmers, etc...all donate money to politicians for their own interests (help you get richer).
#74 | Posted by eberly

Who can put more skin in that game, rich people or poor people?

The game is rigged in favor of the rich.
Republicans think it isn't rigged enough.

"income percentiles don't tell you much unless you qualify it with where you live."

True dat. Living on the east coast, I'm pretty much "median" for my County and age bracket.

"government "red tape" on issuing housing construction permits..."

There are already fifteen million vacant homes in the United States; admittedly about half are vacation homes or so run down as to need major repairs to be livable.

But how many millions more vacant houses do we have to build to meaningfully bring down home prices?

What incentive does a home builder have to build even more homes, increasing the supply, decreasing demand, and reducing their profits?

The problem with this "DATA" is that it only goes from 2021 to 2024
#122 | Posted by CutiePie

Echoes of Goatman Climate Denial -- "There just isn't enough data to say either way."

Hey Republicans,
Why hasn't Trump released:

The October jobs report.
The Quarterly GDP report.
The September inflation report.
The October Consumer Price Index report.

Is it because the Trump Economy stinks on ice?

Why do you always trivialize the violence of 2020
#101 | Posted by BellRinger

We don't trivialize the violence of 2020.
We accurately attribute most of it to the police.

But why Snoofy a broke dick loser?
#66 | Posted by eberly

My dick is fine, thanks for taking an interst.

As for being broke? Well, just like the American economy since 1996, in recent years growth in capital gains has exceeded my growth in wages. I wouldn't call the 24% tax bracket rich, but I'm doing better than the median U.S. individual income.

Is there a Drunk Scouts of America that could step up and fill the void, the way alcohol fills the void for alcoholics?