Maine’s passage of ‘right to food’ amendment stirs celebration, worry

[hadit]

No, dear. Unequal protection of the laws is never legal. Only "illegals" do that while being hypocrites in border threads.

No court has ever found it to be illegal, and you are the only one who thinks it is.

 

[hadit]

I am saying it doesn't matter if we spend it on this due to the multiplier. We could simply print the money.

And there is your economic ignorance on display.

 

[hadit]

Better than enslaving the poor since they will still cost.

That's the thing about America. The poor are not enslaved. They are not locked into their state and can rise out of poverty.

 

[danielpalos]

So do you have a case in Federal Court arguing the Constitutional validity of UE insurance laws?

Or are you simply applying for UE and involved in a Admin hearing?

It is a case in a State Superior Court.

 

[danielpalos]

No court has ever found it to be illegal, and you are the only one who thinks it is.

I understand the meaning of words and resort to the fewest fallacies, unlike the NPD right-wing who have to get all their cases tossed for having nothing but fantasy.

 

[danielpalos]

And there is your economic ignorance on display.

What economic ignorance is that? Only right-wingers have a problem with creating more economic activity via the multiplier instead of losing money via the multiplier.

 

[hadit]

I understand the meaning of words and resort to the fewest fallacies, unlike the NPD right-wing who have to get all their cases tossed for having nothing but fantasy.

You say that in the face of the reality that no court has ever found UC law to be illegal or unconstitutional and you can't cite any legal scholar who agrees with you. Dogmatic to the extreme, yes you are.

 

[hadit]

What economic ignorance is that? Only right-wingers have a problem with creating more economic activity via the multiplier instead of losing money via the multiplier.

Your ignorance that says we can print money with no harmful effect. Your ignorance that says we can set the MW wherever we want to with no harmful effect. That economic ignorance.

 

[danielpalos]

You say that in the face of the reality that no court has ever found UC law to be illegal or unconstitutional and you can't cite any legal scholar who agrees with you. Dogmatic to the extreme, yes you are.

Means nothing since you don't know how many cases were brought before the Court for that.

And, this is actually in our several Constitution:

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

 

[danielpalos]

Your ignorance that says we can print money with no harmful effect. Your ignorance that says we can set the MW wherever we want to with no harmful effect. That economic ignorance.

lol. Your ignorance of economics appeals to ignorance of the positive multiplier.

 

[hadit]

Means nothing since you don't know how many cases were brought before the Court for that.

And, this is actually in our several Constitution:

Do you have any idea how many times the legality of UC law has been challenged? If not, why are you bringing it up?

 

[hadit]

lol. Your ignorance of economics appeals to ignorance of the positive multiplier.

And now you're into, "I know you are, but what am I?" territory. You won't even address your appalling ignorance of basic economic fact.

 

[danielpalos]

Do you have any idea how many times the legality of UC law has been challenged? If not, why are you bringing it up?

I don't need to care. I only need to resort to the fewest fallacies.

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

 

[danielpalos]

And now you're into, "I know you are, but what am I?" territory. You won't even address your appalling ignorance of basic economic fact.

lol. Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

 

[hadit]

I don't need to care. I only need to resort to the fewest fallacies.

And you're not doing that. If you have no idea how much money you'd need to implement your fantasy, it will always remain a fantasy.

 

[hadit]

lol. Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful.

Fantasy is wonderful, but in your case remains only fantasy. You're wrong about simple economics, it's why no one takes you seriously.

 

[danielpalos]

And you're not doing that. If you have no idea how much money you'd need to implement your fantasy, it will always remain a fantasy.

lol. Only the NPD right-wing alleges that. Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful?

 

[danielpalos]

Fantasy is wonderful, but in your case remains only fantasy. You're wrong about simple economics, it's why no one takes you seriously.

I have a case before the Court not right-wing fantasy, dear.

 

[hadit]

lol. Only the NPD right-wing alleges that. Isn't right-wing fantasy wonderful?

How much will it cost? Until you answer that, you get nowhere.

 

[struth]

It is a case in a State Superior Court.

so it’s not a constitutional challenge

what are you appealing a denial of your claim?