Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
True but the people have a huge responsibility to preserve and protect it. Which we dont. Most people like to be led. So they vote that way.
No, it's called sticking by the principle....You either do or you don't...There is no "there isn't anything preventing it" about it.
You'd vote for a lump of shit if it carried a (D) by its name.And you still wa
Sovereign wealth fund - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
I wouldn't vote for Trump if he was a Democrat.
I dont believe you either.And you still wa
Sovereign wealth fund - Wikipedia
I wouldn't vote for Trump if he was a Democrat.
And you still wa
Sovereign wealth fund - Wikipedia
I wouldn't vote for Trump if he was a Democrat.
tax revenue is now bad? Who knewHaving money to fund the things that Government wants to do, is now a left wing position?
Not in the real world.
This dude is just winging it.
What's next? Seizing the means of production? What kind of party are you running over there? I can think of lots of other people I'd want to manage our money rather than a Donald Trump led government... how long until the government is the largest owner of Trump Media?
I'd love to hear what conservatives think of this idea.
Trump unveils plans for U.S. 'sovereign wealth fund' like Saudi Arabia and reveals how he would pay for it | Daily Mail Online
Donald Trump unveiled a radical new plan to use cash from tariffs to fuel a sovereign wealth fund to invest in roads, airports and defense technology on Thursday.
It is the sort of 'build the wall' idea beloved by the former president as he searches for a populist proposal that can excite voters.
Wealth funds are generally set up by governments awash with spare cash generated by oil or gas finds. And Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait have some of the most powerful examples.
But the idea will face the immediate skepticism of economists amid questions about whether Americans would trust politicians to invest billions of dollars on their behalf and whether it is even constitutionally possible.
Maybe so...But Spooner is still correct, as was Jefferson when he pointed out that one incursion on liberty suffered begets the next...Ironic since he pulled the reasoning for the Louisiana Purchase out of his ass.True but the people have a huge responsibility to preserve and protect it. Which we dont. Most people like to be led. So they vote that way.
That document isnt perfect but it is the most progressive(the good kind, not the regressive illiberal shit) and well thought out constitution on the planet.
This dude is just winging it.
What's next? Seizing the means of production? What kind of party are you running over there? I can think of lots of other people I'd want to manage our money rather than a Donald Trump led government... how long until the government is the largest owner of Trump Media?
I'd love to hear what conservatives think of this idea.
Trump unveils plans for U.S. 'sovereign wealth fund' like Saudi Arabia and reveals how he would pay for it | Daily Mail Online
Donald Trump unveiled a radical new plan to use cash from tariffs to fuel a sovereign wealth fund to invest in roads, airports and defense technology on Thursday.
It is the sort of 'build the wall' idea beloved by the former president as he searches for a populist proposal that can excite voters.
Wealth funds are generally set up by governments awash with spare cash generated by oil or gas finds. And Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait have some of the most powerful examples.
But the idea will face the immediate skepticism of economists amid questions about whether Americans would trust politicians to invest billions of dollars on their behalf and whether it is even constitutionally possible.
insider trading everyday baby, how else did they all get millions. Even Bartender AOC, box of rocks yet worth a million now. amazing on 100k salary.We have members of the government manipulating markets now, for their own benefit.
Imagine the government itself doing it. What they could do.
Buuut statist morons will fall in line like the sheep they are.
what money should go to tax breaks? you mean, the GOP believes the people should keep more money that they earn? How is that a bad idea?Horrible idea. As was learned by George HW Bush and shown through complaints during the Clinton administration, Republicans hate government savings and believe the money should go towards tax breaks. Democrats would find new ways to spend the dough at their first opportunity.
Maybe so...But Spooner is still correct, as was Jefferson when he pointed out that one incursion on liberty suffered begets the next...Ironic since he pulled the reasoning for the Louisiana Purchase out of his ass.
tax revenue is now bad? Who knew
that is true, but in order to spend any, one must first bring it in. And that is the taxTaxation is to punish behavior
Not to collect revenue.
You'd vote for a lump of shit if it carried a (D) by its name.
Now go the fuck away, bubblehead.
First thing I did was message my mate who's a retired banker to confirm because I was 99.9% sure, he supplied the extra .1%.Since the wealth fund would not require any funds from the citizens, how is it socialism?
that is true, but in order to spend any, one must first bring it in. And that is the tax
no, not so, they can spend any amount they want, in fact they just raid the fed when they need extra dollars.It's an illusion.
Otherwise we would have a balanced budgrt.
