Georgia Senate blocks mega tax cuts for Delta in response to Delta punishing law abiding NRA

[The Derp]

Well, you know, other than the precipitious drop in their favorability in public opinion. But I suppose they can just say, "Fuck off" to everyone, right?

Airlines have been telling us to fuck off for years...smaller seats, more extra fees, less perks, longer waits, higher cost...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and when a group of activists threaten them they make changes? so they knowingly took a stance, except it may be the wrong side. if those opposed to the NRA felt like boycotting Delta, Delta could have just allowed that to happen and it would have dissolved over time. Now they have a much bigger fight. they, Delta, are on the wrong side of this. there are many more NRA supporters. One doesn't have to be a member to believe in what they stand for. So Delta did more to many many more americans.

And the Ga Senate fucked even more Americans. Almost 300,000 people fly in and out of Atlanta daily and the Ga Senate said that paying a tribute to the NRA was more important than the 100 million plus people a year that fly out of Atlanta.

Delta may have made a bad business decision, that is yet to be determined.

What we know for sure is that the statist action of the Ga Senate was wrong and you would think so also if they had tried to force Delta to pay a tribute to the BLM vice the NRA

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

you simply can't make decisions like what delta did and think there will be zero repercussions. doesn't matter if there should be or not, there will be. the left keeps pushing and pushing and we're to the point the right has had enough and is pushing back.

delta got into a political mess by cutting ties when they did. in a culture where people are LOOKING for reasons to fight, this was gift wrapped and delivered.

to say that delta can do whatever they want in the social world and everyone has to put up with it or innocents may get hurt? never gonna agree to that. you get into the war, people are gonna get hurt.

The Lt. Governor is a fool, and what he stated may even be illegal. Certainly it was stupid, and typical of someone who cannot think of the cost-benefits and cost-deficits of decisions, made by executives and/or legislators they lack the skills to lead.

Think of the message this sends to Amazon, which has named Atlanta as one of the finalists for its second headquarters.

Conservatives are anti-business and create anti-business environments.

 

[iceberg]

so the question is why did they feel the need? were they being hassled? because if they felt hassled, like fedex is being hassled, then they did it for that reason and not neutrality.

Why Delta did what they did is unimportant.

What it comes down to is how each individual views the role of the government.

For most of you the role of the government is to try and force one private entity to give financials discounts to another private entity.

I happen to disagree that is the role of the government


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

 

[The Derp]

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

So....they're now being treated like any other customer by Delta. So that's discrimination, how?

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

Conservative snowflakes should get the fuck over themselves. But no matter, you cannot claim the moral high ground of being pro-business now. Now you're full-on fascists. Think of the message this sends to Amazon, who named Atlanta as one of the finalists for its Second HQ. You think they're gonna consider Atlanta now that the anti-business Conservatives in this state made it clear they will enact punitive harm against a company for ideological reasons...or in other words, fascism.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Delta made this decision on their own. Maybe you should stop being so anti-business while create anti-business environments and driving companies away. You're fucking kidding yourself if you think Amazon will move to GA now...or any business, for that matter.

 

[Cecilie1200]

he's got you 100% pegged on the whole "new word" thing. you seem to lock onto a stereotype and can't wait to use it 100 times a day.

the biggest reason i hate stereotype thinking is because you get a group you hate and if you run into "trouble" getting to know someone, just put them in that group and you don't have to try and think about what they are saying.

but you flog the shit out of words like this and act as if it makes you superior for some reason.

I call things how I see them. Can you think of a more appropriate word for someone that fully supports the government interfering with transactions between two private entities and who supports the government trying to force one private entity to pay tributes to another private entity in the form of discounts?

I mean I guess Communist works, but statist seems to fit better


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Thanks for explaining what 'Obamacare' was.

ObamaCare is a perfect example. So many of the folks on here that support the government trying to force one private entity to pay a tribute to a different entity were the ones whining about ObamaCare.

Why can we not have consistency in our views, regardless of which “side” is doing it?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

There's a difference between "consistency" and "blind, simplistic, one-size-fits-all attitudes".

Obamacare involved the federal government; the Delta thing involves a state government. The two are quite different in their allowed powers, scope of operation, and proper functions.

Obamacare was a law requiring, under pain of legal punishment for non-compliance, individual citizens to actually hand money to a company to purchase something, whether they wanted it or not; the Delta thing is the state of Georgia declining to negotiate a business deal with a company it feels is discriminatory. This, I will remind you yet again, is a policy which people on the left LOVE wholeheartedly when it is micromanaging the hiring demographics of companies wishing to become official vendors and contractors for states (ie. you can't work for a state government unless you employ XYZ percentage non-white people). So don't talk to me about "consistency".

how about a union forcing non union employees to pay union dues? how fking fair is that?

You do not even want to get me started about unions being allowed to force people to join and/or forcing them to pay dues. You'd need a folding chair and a packed lunch before I got done ranting, and it would be impolite to hijack this thread with it.

 

[The Derp]

I call things how I see them. Can you think of a more appropriate word for someone that fully supports the government interfering with transactions between two private entities and who supports the government trying to force one private entity to pay tributes to another private entity in the form of discounts?

I mean I guess Communist works, but statist seems to fit better


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Thanks for explaining what 'Obamacare' was.

ObamaCare is a perfect example. So many of the folks on here that support the government trying to force one private entity to pay a tribute to a different entity were the ones whining about ObamaCare.

Why can we not have consistency in our views, regardless of which “side” is doing it?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

There's a difference between "consistency" and "blind, simplistic, one-size-fits-all attitudes".

Obamacare involved the federal government; the Delta thing involves a state government. The two are quite different in their allowed powers, scope of operation, and proper functions.

Obamacare was a law requiring, under pain of legal punishment for non-compliance, individual citizens to actually hand money to a company to purchase something, whether they wanted it or not; the Delta thing is the state of Georgia declining to negotiate a business deal with a company it feels is discriminatory. This, I will remind you yet again, is a policy which people on the left LOVE wholeheartedly when it is micromanaging the hiring demographics of companies wishing to become official vendors and contractors for states (ie. you can't work for a state government unless you employ XYZ percentage non-white people). So don't talk to me about "consistency".

how about a union forcing non union employees to pay union dues? how fking fair is that?

You do not even want to get me started about unions being allowed to force people to join and/or forcing them to pay dues. You'd need a folding chair and a packed lunch before I got done ranting, and it would be impolite to hijack this thread with it.

Everyone loves what a union negotiates for them, but no one wants to pay dues for it.

Good luck negotiating your contract, by yourself, with the state and no leverage behind you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why Delta did what they did is unimportant.

What it comes down to is how each individual views the role of the government.

For most of you the role of the government is to try and force one private entity to give financials discounts to another private entity.

I happen to disagree that is the role of the government


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

 

[The Derp]

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

Casey Kegel single-handedly killed Atlanta's chances at landing the second Amazon HQ.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thanks for explaining what 'Obamacare' was.

ObamaCare is a perfect example. So many of the folks on here that support the government trying to force one private entity to pay a tribute to a different entity were the ones whining about ObamaCare.

Why can we not have consistency in our views, regardless of which “side” is doing it?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

There's a difference between "consistency" and "blind, simplistic, one-size-fits-all attitudes".

Obamacare involved the federal government; the Delta thing involves a state government. The two are quite different in their allowed powers, scope of operation, and proper functions.

Obamacare was a law requiring, under pain of legal punishment for non-compliance, individual citizens to actually hand money to a company to purchase something, whether they wanted it or not; the Delta thing is the state of Georgia declining to negotiate a business deal with a company it feels is discriminatory. This, I will remind you yet again, is a policy which people on the left LOVE wholeheartedly when it is micromanaging the hiring demographics of companies wishing to become official vendors and contractors for states (ie. you can't work for a state government unless you employ XYZ percentage non-white people). So don't talk to me about "consistency".

how about a union forcing non union employees to pay union dues? how fking fair is that?

You do not even want to get me started about unions being allowed to force people to join and/or forcing them to pay dues. You'd need a folding chair and a packed lunch before I got done ranting, and it would be impolite to hijack this thread with it.

Everyone loves what a union negotiates for them, but no one wants to pay dues for it.

Good luck negotiating your contract, by yourself, with the state and no leverage behind you.

Anti Union people speak mostly out of ignorance and should simply be ignored.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

Casey Kegel single-handedly killed Atlanta's chances at landing the second Amazon HQ.

I suspect you are correct.

 

[jc456]

so the question is why did they feel the need? were they being hassled? because if they felt hassled, like fedex is being hassled, then they did it for that reason and not neutrality.

Why Delta did what they did is unimportant.

What it comes down to is how each individual views the role of the government.

For most of you the role of the government is to try and force one private entity to give financials discounts to another private entity.

I happen to disagree that is the role of the government


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

yep. if anything removing the discount makes them neutral as now NO ONE gets it.

i'm not arguing whether or not the state is making an appropriate move. my base argument is that all of this protesting crap against a non profit org who's never fielded a participant in the mass shootings is now held to blame and an angry mob has found something to be angry about and making demands to get their way. great, their right they can do that.

but for all decisions there are ramifications of those decisions OF WHICH this is - proper or not it's happening. but when the base argument is stupid, not much good can come out of it.

I know the NRA didn't sell the guns to them. I agree. The NRA doesn't reach out and do recruitment for them. There are no victims that were killed by the NRA or any of their members as you pointed out.

For me, Delta can do what they want and live with their consequences and the state can do what they want and live with their consequences. To say one or the other is obligated to each is pure bullshit.

 

[jc456]

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

Casey Kegel single-handedly killed Atlanta's chances at landing the second Amazon HQ.

I suspect you are correct.

How? Amazon isn't making any adjustments to punish the NRA. So why would they care?

 

[Doc1]

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

So....they're now being treated like any other customer by Delta. So that's discrimination, how?

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

Conservative snowflakes should get the fuck over themselves. But no matter, you cannot claim the moral high ground of being pro-business now. Now you're full-on fascists. Think of the message this sends to Amazon, who named Atlanta as one of the finalists for its Second HQ. You think they're gonna consider Atlanta now that the anti-business Conservatives in this state made it clear they will enact punitive harm against a company for ideological reasons...or in other words, fascism.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Delta made this decision on their own. Maybe you should stop being so anti-business while create anti-business environments and driving companies away. You're fucking kidding yourself if you think Amazon will move to GA now...or any business, for that matter.

LOL, damn what a tough guy you pretend to be. The minute a turd like you throws the word "fascist" into a discussion you've lost the argument. I know that it makes you "feel" superior but in reality it just shows everyone that you are just another little man trying to be relevant.

 

[Montrovant]

Can one not appease by being neutral? Does it have to be one or the other?

I choose to believe Delta because they have a track record of withdrawing anything that could be seen as an endorsement from just about anything that is causing controversy at the time.

My stance is the “right” stance, the people supporting the actions of the Ga Senate are taking the “left” stance.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and the NRA is just NOW causing a controversy?

why can you not also be open to they just caved? if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a chicken cause i'd rather believe chicken...

It does not matter to me if they caved, they did nothing illegal and did not discriminate in any way, shape or form.

They are a private entity and should have the freedom to cave without retribution from the government. If in their statement they had said “The NRA sucks and we are done with them”, it would still be wrong for the Govt to get involved.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

we've seem to have taken, as a society, a new meaning to "discrimination" in order to use it as a "HA - BEAT THAT" card.

it's getting harder and harder to sell.

attacking the NRA, OF WHICH not a single shooter HAS EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF isn't discriminating against the NRA and their members? they only did it cause they're not getting their way and they need someone to blame.

the NRA has had nothing to do with a single mass shooting EVER. if i'm wrong, point me to the one that can be traced back to the NRA.

they exist *because of* stupid shit like this the left does to try and guilt people out of their rights "for the children" and it's bullshit. no one IN the NRA WANTS these mass shootings. in effect, they are on the side of common sense.

but the line blurs quite a bit when people can't even talk about guns w/o intentionally being full of shit. see "full semi-automatic mode" as the new CNN phrase to instil fear into people. why is CNN doing this?

there's a lot to this and this is simply one piece of it. the left can protest all they want. the right can in turn react however they want. but to call 1 side out for discrimination is simply eating the poo the other side is shitting out.

Is removing a discount for NRA members going to a convention "attacking" the NRA? Is losing a discount now an attack?

If you are discussing blaming the NRA for school shootings in general, that's different, but in the context of this thread, that would seem to be saying that Delta taking away a discount for NRA members going to their convention is an attack.

it is an attack at law abiding citizens who pay taxes. ones now Delta won't get a break on.

How is removing a perk an attack? It is attacking someone to take away a special consideration and treat them the same way as others are treated; in this case, to have someone pay the same amount for air fare as others?

 

[Doc1]

ObamaCare is a perfect example. So many of the folks on here that support the government trying to force one private entity to pay a tribute to a different entity were the ones whining about ObamaCare.

Why can we not have consistency in our views, regardless of which “side” is doing it?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

There's a difference between "consistency" and "blind, simplistic, one-size-fits-all attitudes".

Obamacare involved the federal government; the Delta thing involves a state government. The two are quite different in their allowed powers, scope of operation, and proper functions.

Obamacare was a law requiring, under pain of legal punishment for non-compliance, individual citizens to actually hand money to a company to purchase something, whether they wanted it or not; the Delta thing is the state of Georgia declining to negotiate a business deal with a company it feels is discriminatory. This, I will remind you yet again, is a policy which people on the left LOVE wholeheartedly when it is micromanaging the hiring demographics of companies wishing to become official vendors and contractors for states (ie. you can't work for a state government unless you employ XYZ percentage non-white people). So don't talk to me about "consistency".

how about a union forcing non union employees to pay union dues? how fking fair is that?

You do not even want to get me started about unions being allowed to force people to join and/or forcing them to pay dues. You'd need a folding chair and a packed lunch before I got done ranting, and it would be impolite to hijack this thread with it.

Everyone loves what a union negotiates for them, but no one wants to pay dues for it.

Good luck negotiating your contract, by yourself, with the state and no leverage behind you.

Anti Union people speak mostly out of ignorance and should simply be ignored.

Meaning you detest any 2 way conversation that you cannot dominate, we get it.

 

[Doc1]

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

Well sure, I mean unless Obama does it.

 

[jc456]

and the NRA is just NOW causing a controversy?

why can you not also be open to they just caved? if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a chicken cause i'd rather believe chicken...

It does not matter to me if they caved, they did nothing illegal and did not discriminate in any way, shape or form.

They are a private entity and should have the freedom to cave without retribution from the government. If in their statement they had said “The NRA sucks and we are done with them”, it would still be wrong for the Govt to get involved.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

we've seem to have taken, as a society, a new meaning to "discrimination" in order to use it as a "HA - BEAT THAT" card.

it's getting harder and harder to sell.

attacking the NRA, OF WHICH not a single shooter HAS EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF isn't discriminating against the NRA and their members? they only did it cause they're not getting their way and they need someone to blame.

the NRA has had nothing to do with a single mass shooting EVER. if i'm wrong, point me to the one that can be traced back to the NRA.

they exist *because of* stupid shit like this the left does to try and guilt people out of their rights "for the children" and it's bullshit. no one IN the NRA WANTS these mass shootings. in effect, they are on the side of common sense.

but the line blurs quite a bit when people can't even talk about guns w/o intentionally being full of shit. see "full semi-automatic mode" as the new CNN phrase to instil fear into people. why is CNN doing this?

there's a lot to this and this is simply one piece of it. the left can protest all they want. the right can in turn react however they want. but to call 1 side out for discrimination is simply eating the poo the other side is shitting out.

Is removing a discount for NRA members going to a convention "attacking" the NRA? Is losing a discount now an attack?

If you are discussing blaming the NRA for school shootings in general, that's different, but in the context of this thread, that would seem to be saying that Delta taking away a discount for NRA members going to their convention is an attack.

it is an attack at law abiding citizens who pay taxes. ones now Delta won't get a break on.

How is removing a perk an attack? It is attacking someone to take away a special consideration and treat them the same way as others are treated; in this case, to have someone pay the same amount for air fare as others?

is there an isolated target? if so, then it is an attack. If they had said everyone who had discounts isn't getting that perk any longer then it is not an attack at anyone. It becomes a business decision only not an attack that punishes individuals. Again, it isn't the NRA that is the target, it is the members which are individuals.

 

[jc456]

There's a difference between "consistency" and "blind, simplistic, one-size-fits-all attitudes".

Obamacare involved the federal government; the Delta thing involves a state government. The two are quite different in their allowed powers, scope of operation, and proper functions.

Obamacare was a law requiring, under pain of legal punishment for non-compliance, individual citizens to actually hand money to a company to purchase something, whether they wanted it or not; the Delta thing is the state of Georgia declining to negotiate a business deal with a company it feels is discriminatory. This, I will remind you yet again, is a policy which people on the left LOVE wholeheartedly when it is micromanaging the hiring demographics of companies wishing to become official vendors and contractors for states (ie. you can't work for a state government unless you employ XYZ percentage non-white people). So don't talk to me about "consistency".

how about a union forcing non union employees to pay union dues? how fking fair is that?

You do not even want to get me started about unions being allowed to force people to join and/or forcing them to pay dues. You'd need a folding chair and a packed lunch before I got done ranting, and it would be impolite to hijack this thread with it.

Everyone loves what a union negotiates for them, but no one wants to pay dues for it.

Good luck negotiating your contract, by yourself, with the state and no leverage behind you.

Anti Union people speak mostly out of ignorance and should simply be ignored.

Meaning you detest any 2 way conversation that you cannot dominate, we get it.

dude spot on^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[jc456]

then it doesn't matter what the state did either. they have that right just like Delta. You keep arguing your own points against yourself.

No, they do not. The state is supposed to be a neutral operator, not biased towards one company over another.

I am with 100% honesty shocked at your view of what the government is supposed to be.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

how are they not being neutral? they don't give that tax incentive to any other airline or the gas incentives either.

The state is trying to force one private entity to give financial discounts to another private entity. There is nothing neutral about that. That is picking a side and telling the 30,000 citizens that work for the other company “we do not give a shit about you”.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i take it as the state is acting in defense of their NRA members who are losing benefits because of their association with the NRA, ie - being targeted.

no one said the state was being neutral as far as i know. they are mad cause Delta is going after the NRA along with other companies and conservatives are tired of it. this is really just the beginning of seeing conservatives hit back and the left isn't used to it. they're used to whining something about racism and haters and getting their way.

days of that are over which is going to make a lot more of this yelling and screaming as we all adjust to not saying "ok" to everything the left wants and when we do, not caving into their one of a billion protests of the moment.

Using the tax code to punish a corporation or an individual is or ought to be illegal. I don't know the laws which are on the books in Georgia, but I suspect such an act by the Lt. Gov. is Malfeasance, at best.

Like the IRS did to conservatives you mean under obummer?

 

[Montrovant]

Can one not appease by being neutral? Does it have to be one or the other?

I choose to believe Delta because they have a track record of withdrawing anything that could be seen as an endorsement from just about anything that is causing controversy at the time.

My stance is the “right” stance, the people supporting the actions of the Ga Senate are taking the “left” stance.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and the NRA is just NOW causing a controversy?

why can you not also be open to they just caved? if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a chicken cause i'd rather believe chicken...

It does not matter to me if they caved, they did nothing illegal and did not discriminate in any way, shape or form.

They are a private entity and should have the freedom to cave without retribution from the government. If in their statement they had said “The NRA sucks and we are done with them”, it would still be wrong for the Govt to get involved.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

we've seem to have taken, as a society, a new meaning to "discrimination" in order to use it as a "HA - BEAT THAT" card.

it's getting harder and harder to sell.

attacking the NRA, OF WHICH not a single shooter HAS EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF isn't discriminating against the NRA and their members?.

Having a discount for one week a year to one specific location taken away is not an attack, this I think is where you and I will never see eye to eye.

The discount was a perk, nothing something earned or something deserved or something required. As such removing it cannot be an attack.

An attack on the NRA and its Members would be to ban them from their planes or raise your prices for for people flying to the convention city.

And even if it were an “attack” it was a perfectly legal one and the government still had no place interfering. We as a country rely way too much on the government to fight our fights for us. It is like running to your big brother for help after talking shit to someone

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then fine. i'll buy the "legal" stance.

but it's also legal to end deltas gas subsidies.

It's not ending the tax break that's an issue (at least for me), it's the rationale given and the way the government went about it, explicitly saying it was because of Delta stopping discounts for NRA members and even indicating the tax break would continue if Delta reversed their decision and reinstated the discounts. The Georgia government basically said, "If Delta does not go back to giving a special perk to NRA members, no airlines will get a fuel tax break." In my opinion that is a horrible reason for denying the tax break. The government pressuring one specific company to give a discount to a specific organization is a misuse of power.

More, if the information I've read about this is correct, the tax break was not just for Delta, but all airlines. Why is the Georgia government ending tax breaks for all airlines? Why not make an exception to the legislation so that Delta would not qualify unless they reinstituted NRA discounts?

 

[Montrovant]

It does not matter to me if they caved, they did nothing illegal and did not discriminate in any way, shape or form.

They are a private entity and should have the freedom to cave without retribution from the government. If in their statement they had said “The NRA sucks and we are done with them”, it would still be wrong for the Govt to get involved.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

no one accused them of doing anything illegal. the state merely made a neutrality decision.

The state was not neutral, the state took the side of one private entity over another...something that should bother everyone.

I am betting the next time it happens m, but this time the state picks the BLM to support, you will not be so agreeable about it.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

delta was not neutral. the heat got turned up, they bailed.

this is what happens in stupid "wars" is all.

Delta does not have to be neutral, they are there to make money. The government on the other hand is supposed to be neutral, and not force one company to give discounts to another


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great - except delta SAID they were neutral when clearly they are not. neutral would be staying the course. anything else, to me, picks a side. and the ramifications for doing so in this instance could cost them $50mil.

By giving the NRA a discount, couldn't they be said to have already picked a side; by taking the discount away, they are moving from the NRA's side to a neutral ground. I understand the perception that this is a move in opposition to the NRA, and it's possible that's true, but it still ends up being a move from giving the NRA special consideration to not giving them special consideration.