Funnelling money back to the rich. Trump's policy.

[JimH52]

I always forget the reasons. Why is that? Do they have any sort of rational explanations whatsoever?

Let us see if they can say anything that is not utilizing victimology.

Anything.

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

Hold on a minute here!
So you're saying that motivated, hard working, intelligent people who make a positive contribution will be rewarded
AND
lazy, never working, iQ challenged folks who are dead weight on the economy won't get enough free shit?
Hmmm, we must have moved away from the ass-backward bottom up Libtard bullshit.

Ah, so people who don't earn much money are lazy, while rich people born with a silver spoon in their mouth are hard working?

Some of these "lazy people" are working 80 hours a week to keep food on their kids' table.

There you go with the excuse making....The ole we're losers because 'the system' is designed to keep us losers..bullshit.
You acknowledge the 1% on both sides of your point ...we generalize based on masses; lets not play semantics.

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

Vouchers give people choices. Freedom is choice. The more choice one has, the more freedom one has.

You can't improve those public schools. The US spends more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet have mediocre results to show for it. Every time a problem came up with public schools, the Democrat answer was to just throw more money at it and it hasn't helped very much.

If the school would spend all their time on academics, there would be a different result. We have programs to teach students how to cross the street, brush their teeth, to accept gay marriages, safe touch, cookie sales, wrapping paper sales. arts programs that feature ballet, jazz, square dancing and orchestra, fire safety and safe sex. Hell, we have taken most every responsibility away from the parents and use class time to teach these non academic curricula and we test their eyes, hearing and monitor their weight. We even have a nurse full time on duty to tend to sick kids so the parents don't have to take their kids to the doctor when they are sick. We enable parents to be irresponsible even to the degree we feed them breakfast and lunch, even during the summer. The cost is staggering. When I was a kid, I went home for lunch and no one but my parents were responsible for feeding me.

If we have to have these special programs, then extend the school day and take away some other programs that are duplicative.

The question here is: What do we want kids to know? What is important for kids to know and understand? If people can have happier lives by being more tolerant, isn't that worthy? If they are more productive, more skillful by having programs that make them this, isn't that worth it?

Ghetto parents suck and expect the school system and government to raise their kids for them...socially and financially. Our public schools are a joke and you're right...the teaching of academics is secondary. Kids from legitimate families where social and behavior standards are taught at home by good quality parents get screwed if they're sent to a public school...Nobody I know who's legitimate sends their children to public schools anymore. There's no way I'm sending my kids to hang with all the ghetto trash at public schools these days.

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

His policy is the "drain the swamp" of Millionaires and replace them with Billionaires. BRILLIANT!

Yeah, he's so stupid to "take care" of his higher end people.
Like any good business, sports team...etc etc he should really take better care of the lower end people first...that make perfect sense...just ask any lower end person...haha....Just send more EBT cards out and keep covering up the problem with more taxpayer cash....That's been working so AWESOME!
People need to start to realize that many cultures are just programmed to be comfortable being un-driven trash. "You can't turn a Sow's ear to a silk purse." "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink."
The coddling and excuse making has to stop...it's time to play hardball with the lower class...poor decision making that leads to stealing from taxpayers needs to be considered a criminal act...This is quite simple for anyone who's not low class.

Actually, since the advent of Reaganomics, the trickle down theory, the gap between the rich and the poor has widened. We in the middle class get to pay for both the 1% tax cuts and the lower end benefits. Trump will widen the divide even further and put more pressure on the middle class.

 

[Lastamender]

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

I have no problem with vetting people from all countries, targeting Muslims is ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous?

Vetting people from all countries? Doesn't that fall under the same stupidity as the TSA strip searching 80 year old white women with red wigs on while younger middle- eastern men just jump aboard airplanes no questions asked?

When it comes to politically correct, it has it's place, but not with the security of our people and country.

Terrorists can come from anywhere, they don't need to be Muslims.

But most of them are. Do you want to turn into some other countries that have accepted these people without regard to background checks and have more terrorist activities than we do?

How many people from Islam kill people compared to other religions? Christians probably kill far more, far more terrorist attacks come from Christians than Muslims in the US, and yet..... you want to target Muslims.

Islamic jihad has killed 270 million people. And we are still counting. Muslims are targeted because the doctrine sanctions violence and terror. You have no basis accusing Christians killing because they are Christian. And the is nothing in Christian doctrine that comes close to suggesting any such thing.

The only conclusion is you are woefully uninformed, disingenuous, or willfully ignorant. In any case you are dead wrong.

 

[Lastamender]

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

And the Left does not give a fuck about the citizens of this country. We give the government its power not the other way around. And that power we give is to insure our safety and do things with our interests being foremost.

Does the right? I mean, when you get into this partisan team game bullshit, it's all about winning and not about what's best.

The establishment of the Right or the Left both lost this election. Trump is a populist.

Possibly, but then "right and left" don't exist as right and left. You have the Republicans and the Democrats, and one side claims to be right, the other claims to be left. Who won? Not the people, that's who.

The people did. That is what populism is about.

 

[Jackson]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

Vouchers give people choices. Freedom is choice. The more choice one has, the more freedom one has.

You can't improve those public schools. The US spends more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet have mediocre results to show for it. Every time a problem came up with public schools, the Democrat answer was to just throw more money at it and it hasn't helped very much.

If the school would spend all their time on academics, there would be a different result. We have programs to teach students how to cross the street, brush their teeth, to accept gay marriages, safe touch, cookie sales, wrapping paper sales. arts programs that feature ballet, jazz, square dancing and orchestra, fire safety and safe sex. Hell, we have taken most every responsibility away from the parents and use class time to teach these non academic curricula and we test their eyes, hearing and monitor their weight. We even have a nurse full time on duty to tend to sick kids so the parents don't have to take their kids to the doctor when they are sick. We enable parents to be irresponsible even to the degree we feed them breakfast and lunch, even during the summer. The cost is staggering. When I was a kid, I went home for lunch and no one but my parents were responsible for feeding me.

If we have to have these special programs, then extend the school day and take away some other programs that are duplicative.

The question here is: What do we want kids to know? What is important for kids to know and understand? If people can have happier lives by being more tolerant, isn't that worthy? If they are more productive, more skillful by having programs that make them this, isn't that worth it?

The answer is that you are providing a liberal bias instead of facts. Teach the history and let the students form their own opinions.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Trump's picks are all excellent. Did you expect him to put failures in positions. Now it is true that successful people generally have incomes to match. Failures are normally jobless and poor.

So you're saying they're going to be good just because they're rich? That makes no sense. You put in Bill Gates at Quarter Back and expect him to perform simply because he's rich?

And who do you think Hillary would have put in her cabinet, genius, a cashier from Burger King and a guy digging ditches on the street? You would have seen the same kind of people in her cabinet as well, rich Wall Street types. She was in bed with them.

The bottom line is nobody who voted for Trump cares that he's rich. If it was an issue for them they wouldn't have supported him. The only people who are making a big deal about it, ironically, are the people who supported the rich white woman who was the biggest Wall Street whore to ever be nominated for the presidency.

 

[BrokeLoser]

I always forget the reasons. Why is that? Do they have any sort of rational explanations whatsoever?

Let us see if they can say anything that is not utilizing victimology.

Anything.

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

Hold on a minute here!
So you're saying that motivated, hard working, intelligent people who make a positive contribution will be rewarded
AND
lazy, never working, iQ challenged folks who are dead weight on the economy won't get enough free shit?
Hmmm, we must have moved away from the ass-backward bottom up Libtard bullshit.

Ah, so people who don't earn much money are lazy, while rich people born with a silver spoon in their mouth are hard working?

Some of these "lazy people" are working 80 hours a week to keep food on their kids' table.

There you go with the excuse making....The ole we're losers because 'the system' is designed to keep us losers..bullshit.
You acknowledge the 1% on both sides of your point ...we generalize based on masses; lets not play semantics.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

Vouchers give people choices. Freedom is choice. The more choice one has, the more freedom one has.

You can't improve those public schools. The US spends more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet have mediocre results to show for it. Every time a problem came up with public schools, the Democrat answer was to just throw more money at it and it hasn't helped very much.

If the school would spend all their time on academics, there would be a different result. We have programs to teach students how to cross the street, brush their teeth, to accept gay marriages, safe touch, cookie sales, wrapping paper sales. arts programs that feature ballet, jazz, square dancing and orchestra, fire safety and safe sex. Hell, we have taken most every responsibility away from the parents and use class time to teach these non academic curricula and we test their eyes, hearing and monitor their weight. We even have a nurse full time on duty to tend to sick kids so the parents don't have to take their kids to the doctor when they are sick. We enable parents to be irresponsible even to the degree we feed them breakfast and lunch, even during the summer. The cost is staggering. When I was a kid, I went home for lunch and no one but my parents were responsible for feeding me.

If we have to have these special programs, then extend the school day and take away some other programs that are duplicative.

The question here is: What do we want kids to know? What is important for kids to know and understand? If people can have happier lives by being more tolerant, isn't that worthy? If they are more productive, more skillful by having programs that make them this, isn't that worth it?

Ghetto parents suck and expect the school system and government to raise their kids for them...socially and financially. Our public schools are a joke and you're right...the teaching of academics is secondary. Kids from legitimate families where social and behavior standards are taught at home by good quality parents get screwed if they're sent to a public school...Nobody I know who's legitimate sends their children to public schools anymore. There's no way I'm sending my kids to hang with all the ghetto trash at public schools these days.

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

His policy is the "drain the swamp" of Millionaires and replace them with Billionaires. BRILLIANT!

Yeah, he's so stupid to "take care" of his higher end people.
Like any good business, sports team...etc etc he should really take better care of the lower end people first...that make perfect sense...just ask any lower end person...haha....Just send more EBT cards out and keep covering up the problem with more taxpayer cash....That's been working so AWESOME!
People need to start to realize that many cultures are just programmed to be comfortable being un-driven trash. "You can't turn a Sow's ear to a silk purse." "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink."
The coddling and excuse making has to stop...it's time to play hardball with the lower class...poor decision making that leads to stealing from taxpayers needs to be considered a criminal act...This is quite simple for anyone who's not low class.

Actually, since the advent of Reaganomics, the trickle down theory, the gap between the rich and the poor has widened. We in the middle class get to pay for both the 1% tax cuts and the lower end benefits. Trump will widen the divide even further and put more pressure on the middle class.

Bullshit lies!
Actually, I think we both know the gap has widened between the rich and poor not because Reganomics failed but because Reagan signed an amnesty bill in 1986 granting citizenship to 3 million low quality humans and fucked us to tears in doing so. Did anyone stop to think that 3 million humans that breed like cockroaches would multiply into 30 million in no time?

 

[JimH52]

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

And the Left does not give a fuck about the citizens of this country. We give the government its power not the other way around. And that power we give is to insure our safety and do things with our interests being foremost.

Does the right? I mean, when you get into this partisan team game bullshit, it's all about winning and not about what's best.

The establishment of the Right or the Left both lost this election. Trump is a populist.

Possibly, but then "right and left" don't exist as right and left. You have the Republicans and the Democrats, and one side claims to be right, the other claims to be left. Who won? Not the people, that's who.

The people did. That is what populism is about.

Nope, the EV says he won. The majority of the people did not vote for the man.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How many people from Islam kill people compared to other religions? Christians probably kill far more, far more terrorist attacks come from Christians than Muslims in the US, and yet..... you want to target Muslims.

Outside of some crackpot killing an abortion doctor, when was the last time a person murdered somebody in the name of Christianity in the US?

 

[HenryBHough]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

Suck it up buttercup!

Wealth? Like you ever had any? Here'a a song to sooth you:



Pay attention to the lyric about losing shit....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

Vouchers give people choices. Freedom is choice. The more choice one has, the more freedom one has.

You can't improve those public schools. The US spends more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet have mediocre results to show for it. Every time a problem came up with public schools, the Democrat answer was to just throw more money at it and it hasn't helped very much.

If the school would spend all their time on academics, there would be a different result. We have programs to teach students how to cross the street, brush their teeth, to accept gay marriages, safe touch, cookie sales, wrapping paper sales. arts programs that feature ballet, jazz, square dancing and orchestra, fire safety and safe sex. Hell, we have taken most every responsibility away from the parents and use class time to teach these non academic curricula and we test their eyes, hearing and monitor their weight. We even have a nurse full time on duty to tend to sick kids so the parents don't have to take their kids to the doctor when they are sick. We enable parents to be irresponsible even to the degree we feed them breakfast and lunch, even during the summer. The cost is staggering. When I was a kid, I went home for lunch and no one but my parents were responsible for feeding me.

If we have to have these special programs, then extend the school day and take away some other programs that are duplicative.

That's exactly right. When I was in school many years ago, the effort was to teach kids about becoming an adult, and I don't mean practicing putting rubbers on bananas.

It's not a wonder why kids (especially in lower income areas) feel so helpless. If you weren't born into the right family; in the right neighborhood; in the right color of skin, you better hope you play great basketball or can make great rap songs.

So you ask a high school kid what they know about investing money? What do they know about the stock market? The real estate market? The commodities market? Starting your own business? Compound interest? You will be met with a blank stare.

Then they come out of school barely being able to read their diploma, and practice the real lessons they learned in life like milking the welfare program, how to manipulate applications for social services, how much money can be made selling dope on the street.

Like Commie Care, the entire system has to be destroyed and rebuilt from ground up. For the many that don't have the aptitude for college, they should be learning about some kind of trades in the school itself.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Most of that money went to mandatory spending that only Congress can change,

and to the military.

Oh for crying out loud. He spent over 800 million dollars on a stupid internet site.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

I have no problem with vetting people from all countries, targeting Muslims is ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous?

Vetting people from all countries? Doesn't that fall under the same stupidity as the TSA strip searching 80 year old white women with red wigs on while younger middle- eastern men just jump aboard airplanes no questions asked?

When it comes to politically correct, it has it's place, but not with the security of our people and country.

Terrorists can come from anywhere, they don't need to be Muslims.

Correct with the use of the word "can" Yes, they "can" come from anywhere, but they mostly come from (or have associations with) the middle-east. Just had one here last week. A Somalian ran into some people with his car and then jumped out and knifed the others. One of those mean white cops put him in his grave. Watch how DumBama and the left resist calling it a terrorist attack. Probably invent a new term like College Place Violence or something like that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

What the fuck our you fear mongering about? What the fuck did obozo do? He made wall street rich and fucked over main street

Did he? Are people poorer now than they were after Bush had got done with it all?

 

[whitehall]

The thing of it is that if the rich ( what is it, 50 or 60k gross income?) don't get richer you can bet your ass(ets) that nobody will get richer under democrat socialist policies.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I have no problem with vetting people from all countries, targeting Muslims is ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous?

Vetting people from all countries? Doesn't that fall under the same stupidity as the TSA strip searching 80 year old white women with red wigs on while younger middle- eastern men just jump aboard airplanes no questions asked?

When it comes to politically correct, it has it's place, but not with the security of our people and country.

Terrorists can come from anywhere, they don't need to be Muslims.

But most of them are. Do you want to turn into some other countries that have accepted these people without regard to background checks and have more terrorist activities than we do?

How many people from Islam kill people compared to other religions? Christians probably kill far more, far more terrorist attacks come from Christians than Muslims in the US, and yet..... you want to target Muslims.

Islamic jihad has killed 270 million people. And we are still counting. Muslims are targeted because the doctrine sanctions violence and terror. You have no basis accusing Christians killing because they are Christian. And the is nothing in Christian doctrine that comes close to suggesting any such thing.

The only conclusion is you are woefully uninformed, disingenuous, or willfully ignorant. In any case you are dead wrong.

Where are your sources for "270 million people"?

Muslims and violence huh?

Let's look at this.

List of cities by murder rate - Wikipedia

In the top 40 only one of those cities is outside of the Americas, it's Cape Town and that's in a Christian country too. In fact the top 50 cities are ALL CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES.

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia

By firearm homicides you have to get down to Israel before you see a single non-Christian country there.

You're looking at 1.04 per 100,000 gun homicides. Then Turkey is next. But that's 22 countries above these two.

List of invasions - Wikipedia

List of invasions since 2000.

You have Israel, twice, Russia twice, Comoros and Ethiopia once, the US/UK twice.

Well, that's 4 to Christianity, two to Judaism, one to Islam (though to be fair they were invading their own country) and Ethiopia's largest religion is Christianity.

So....

Basically Christian countries are the biggest threat, they're the biggest crime bases, they're the biggest problems and yet you blame Islamic countries.... why is that?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

What the fuck our you fear mongering about? What the fuck did obozo do? He made wall street rich and fucked over main street

Did he? Are people poorer now than they were after Bush had got done with it all?

View attachment 100529

Posting a chart doesn't help me.

Also, how much impact did the 2008 recession, the reduction of taxes for the rich by Bush, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the subsequent costs of this have anything to do with this?

I mean, this isn't something that happens over night. Policy consequences last for years.

 

[frigidweirdo]

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

And the Left does not give a fuck about the citizens of this country. We give the government its power not the other way around. And that power we give is to insure our safety and do things with our interests being foremost.

Does the right? I mean, when you get into this partisan team game bullshit, it's all about winning and not about what's best.

The establishment of the Right or the Left both lost this election. Trump is a populist.

Possibly, but then "right and left" don't exist as right and left. You have the Republicans and the Democrats, and one side claims to be right, the other claims to be left. Who won? Not the people, that's who.

The people did. That is what populism is about.

Rubbish. The rich won.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

Vouchers give people choices. Freedom is choice. The more choice one has, the more freedom one has.

You can't improve those public schools. The US spends more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet have mediocre results to show for it. Every time a problem came up with public schools, the Democrat answer was to just throw more money at it and it hasn't helped very much.

If the school would spend all their time on academics, there would be a different result. We have programs to teach students how to cross the street, brush their teeth, to accept gay marriages, safe touch, cookie sales, wrapping paper sales. arts programs that feature ballet, jazz, square dancing and orchestra, fire safety and safe sex. Hell, we have taken most every responsibility away from the parents and use class time to teach these non academic curricula and we test their eyes, hearing and monitor their weight. We even have a nurse full time on duty to tend to sick kids so the parents don't have to take their kids to the doctor when they are sick. We enable parents to be irresponsible even to the degree we feed them breakfast and lunch, even during the summer. The cost is staggering. When I was a kid, I went home for lunch and no one but my parents were responsible for feeding me.

If we have to have these special programs, then extend the school day and take away some other programs that are duplicative.

The question here is: What do we want kids to know? What is important for kids to know and understand? If people can have happier lives by being more tolerant, isn't that worthy? If they are more productive, more skillful by having programs that make them this, isn't that worth it?

The answer is that you are providing a liberal bias instead of facts. Teach the history and let the students form their own opinions.

I disagree to a certain extent.

Teach the SKILLS and then let them decide. Personally for me, and I've seen it being done, history is a tool for teaching thinking skills. Have kids look at the sources, have them decide if the sources are reliable or not, have the kids then make an argument and get good grades based on whether they've made a decent stab at an argument.
I mean, I've seen 11 years olds do what most people on this forum struggle to do. What most voters struggle to do. And it's important for voters to be able to search through the bullshit, but they can't.

However when it comes to living in society, some things just have to happen, and you can call it indoctrination or whatever you like, but it makes things better.


Go to China and you see spitting in the streets, you see throwing out of trash anywhere and everywhere, you see people pushing onto the subway or into elevators before anyone's even got out. These are things that people should be taught are bad, they're not conductive for living together and kids should be taught this.

Personally I think kids should be helped to think about how to choose a partner, how to have a good marriage, how to bring up children, food nutrition, how to respect others and many other things which are SKILLS for living within a complex society.

 

[initforme]

When the rich get richer the poor have to get poorer. That is america and I will say it is not great.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

What the fuck our you fear mongering about? What the fuck did obozo do? He made wall street rich and fucked over main street

Did he? Are people poorer now than they were after Bush had got done with it all?

View attachment 100529

Posting a chart doesn't help me.

Also, how much impact did the 2008 recession, the reduction of taxes for the rich by Bush, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the subsequent costs of this have anything to do with this?

I mean, this isn't something that happens over night. Policy consequences last for years.

Ah yes, it's back to "It's Bush's fault" again. So tell me, when did DumBama claim the recession ended? Please look at the chart for help. How many years afterwards did this Bush ramification last? Please look at the chart.

Another question: when did Republicans take leadership of Congress again? Please look at the chart. And when did fuel prices drop (the real economic relief)? Please refer to the chart.