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.
Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.Little rock 9 was 1957, moron.You asked why legislation is necessary. That's why. Because up until very recently in American history they couldn't even share a sidewalk or a drinking fountain with a white, let alone a school. You think racism that our country was built on and operated on for centuries disappeared completely in a few decades you're a moron and missed the events of the kkk all over the country recently.
Why didn't you say you support the hypocritical concept of using race to advance a group that complained about race being used to deny? If using race is bad, it's bad whether you benefit or are denied. It can't be a good thing and excused away because "you're making up for something".
I started school in the mid to late 1960s. I sat in classrooms with blacks from the time I went to 5K. We all had the same books, teachers, desks, restrooms, lessons, etc. For a black my age to say they didn't have the chances I had is nothing more than an excuse.
The NAACP lawyers that argued Brown v BOE had law degrees, many from segregated schools. Are you saying their law degrees because they came from segregated schools were of a lesser value?
Brown v BOE was 1954, boy.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Trump supports raising the minimum wage. He said it should be raised to at least $10.The right wing has a problem with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, so more people will be able to pay, more taxes.I always find this narrative fascinating....The top 1% of wage earners already pay 45% of all income tax paid and 45% of American's pay no income tax at all.
That said, how is the notion that our most productive positive contributors owe more manifested?
Why is it never said that we have too many bottom feeders stealing from the middle class and how does that not make more sense to sane rational folks? Take the $100 billion we spend on illegal beaners every year...what if we diverted that cash alone and funneled it through the hands of the middle class and REAL Americans?
So then two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stop adding more wrongs.
I think welfare should be temporary. Not sure what you are going on about. I would like a strong job market and wages so few are on welfare.
As you know, petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama nearly doubled the number of people on welfare. He did that by changing the work requirement for welfare when he signed the failed Stimulus Package.
Repubs are in control, they will change that then?
Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.Little rock 9 was 1957, moron.Why didn't you say you support the hypocritical concept of using race to advance a group that complained about race being used to deny? If using race is bad, it's bad whether you benefit or are denied. It can't be a good thing and excused away because "you're making up for something".
I started school in the mid to late 1960s. I sat in classrooms with blacks from the time I went to 5K. We all had the same books, teachers, desks, restrooms, lessons, etc. For a black my age to say they didn't have the chances I had is nothing more than an excuse.
The NAACP lawyers that argued Brown v BOE had law degrees, many from segregated schools. Are you saying their law degrees because they came from segregated schools were of a lesser value?
Brown v BOE was 1954, boy.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Just another catch 22 to keep the poor poor and the rich rich.
I've been called worse by better people...
Tax cuts on the wealthy and cuts to programs that help working Americans has resulted in a redistribution of wealth (upward) for thirty years
Why is trying to end a failed experiment in supply side economics being considered redistribution of wealth?
How then did the great President Ronald Reagan's economic policies lead to over twenty-five years of economic growth and the tax cuts led to increased revenues.
As you know too, the Democrat congress had promised President Reagan that if they passed tax cuts they would also pass spending cuts. No surprise, the Democrats LIED and they never passed any spending cuts.
One major change desperately needed in our budget is to do away with Baseline Budgeting. It is a fraud on the gullible voter who actually believes that when Congress says they are cutting spending, they are not. They are simply cutting the RATE OF INCREASE.
So then two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stop adding more wrongs.
I think welfare should be temporary. Not sure what you are going on about. I would like a strong job market and wages so few are on welfare.
As you know, petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama nearly doubled the number of people on welfare. He did that by changing the work requirement for welfare when he signed the failed Stimulus Package.
Repubs are in control, they will change that then?
With any luck at all. The Welfare Reform Act of 1996, promised by House Speaker Newt Gingrich was incredibly successful. Most likely a primary reason President Obama wanted it eliminated.
Neither is good. A leech is a drain on society and those that enable leeches are worse. I have an excellent solution if you don't think someone that uses social welfare has what he/she needs. Write them a personal check without any of it going through the government to prove you care as much as you claim. We both know they won't get a dime if you actually have to do it yourself.
So then two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stop adding more wrongs.
I think welfare should be temporary. Not sure what you are going on about. I would like a strong job market and wages so few are on welfare.
I think welfare shouldn't exist. I think that if you want someone to have something they don't have, you should buy it for them personally. I think if someone wants a higher wage they should do something to earn it by improving their skills. You want higher wages given to someone because they exist. You're trying to solve a problem with money when the problem isn't caused by a lack of money.
Welfare is fine on a temporary basis. You want everyone between jobs to go bankrupt?
No it's not.
I've provided a way for all those you reference to avoid that. It involves YOU doing for them what you say should be done. If they go bankrupt, you're not doing your part. If they do, I could care less.
Yes lots of bankruptcies would be great for the economy.
So then two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stop adding more wrongs.
I think welfare should be temporary. Not sure what you are going on about. I would like a strong job market and wages so few are on welfare.
As you know, petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama nearly doubled the number of people on welfare. He did that by changing the work requirement for welfare when he signed the failed Stimulus Package.
Repubs are in control, they will change that then?
You would tank the economy. Nobody wins. But stupid seems to be your thing.So then two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stop adding more wrongs.
I think welfare should be temporary. Not sure what you are going on about. I would like a strong job market and wages so few are on welfare.
I think welfare shouldn't exist. I think that if you want someone to have something they don't have, you should buy it for them personally. I think if someone wants a higher wage they should do something to earn it by improving their skills. You want higher wages given to someone because they exist. You're trying to solve a problem with money when the problem isn't caused by a lack of money.
Welfare is fine on a temporary basis. You want everyone between jobs to go bankrupt?
No it's not.
I've provided a way for all those you reference to avoid that. It involves YOU doing for them what you say should be done. If they go bankrupt, you're not doing your part. If they do, I could care less.
Yes lots of bankruptcies would be great for the economy.
No one to blame but yourself. I've provided a way for you to prevent it but it involves you spending your money not you spending someone else's money.
Maybe Hillary can motivate you into giving up all of your money that you have saved for your retirement.I always find this narrative fascinating....The top 1% of wage earners already pay 45% of all income tax paid and 45% of American's pay no income tax at all.
That said, how is the notion that our most productive positive contributors owe more manifested?
Why is it never said that we have too many bottom feeders stealing from the middle class and how does that not make more sense to sane rational folks? Take the $100 billion we spend on illegal beaners every year...what if we diverted that cash alone and funneled it through the hands of the middle class and REAL Americans?
Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.Little rock 9 was 1957, moron.Why didn't you say you support the hypocritical concept of using race to advance a group that complained about race being used to deny? If using race is bad, it's bad whether you benefit or are denied. It can't be a good thing and excused away because "you're making up for something".
I started school in the mid to late 1960s. I sat in classrooms with blacks from the time I went to 5K. We all had the same books, teachers, desks, restrooms, lessons, etc. For a black my age to say they didn't have the chances I had is nothing more than an excuse.
The NAACP lawyers that argued Brown v BOE had law degrees, many from segregated schools. Are you saying their law degrees because they came from segregated schools were of a lesser value?
Brown v BOE was 1954, boy.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Just another catch 22 to keep the poor poor and the rich rich.
I've been called worse by better people...
You would tank the economy. Nobody wins. But stupid seems to be your thing.I think welfare shouldn't exist. I think that if you want someone to have something they don't have, you should buy it for them personally. I think if someone wants a higher wage they should do something to earn it by improving their skills. You want higher wages given to someone because they exist. You're trying to solve a problem with money when the problem isn't caused by a lack of money.
Welfare is fine on a temporary basis. You want everyone between jobs to go bankrupt?
No it's not.
I've provided a way for all those you reference to avoid that. It involves YOU doing for them what you say should be done. If they go bankrupt, you're not doing your part. If they do, I could care less.
Yes lots of bankruptcies would be great for the economy.
No one to blame but yourself. I've provided a way for you to prevent it but it involves you spending your money not you spending someone else's money.
More moved to lower income.How much is a quarter percentage vs 3%? Which is more?What? Members of the middle class are disappearing? Alien abductions maybe?
Or they are simply becoming more prosperous? And moving from the middle class to the upper class?
Ummm... that's supposed to be a good thing, isn't it?
What exactly is the problem here?
Or, could it be that, as prosperity spreads, people are realizing they don't need liberals any more? And maybe they never did? So the strength of liberals (and the Democrat party) is shrinking?
Again, why is that a problem?
From link
Only about a quarter of a percent of US households have climbed up the ladder from the middle class into the upper-income bracket since 2000, according to the latest review by the IMF. Meanwhile, more than 3% of middle-income households have moved into the low-income bracket.
That's a flip from the trend between 1970 and 2000, where middle-income households were more likely to move upward.
Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.Little rock 9 was 1957, moron.
Brown v BOE was 1954, boy.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Just another catch 22 to keep the poor poor and the rich rich.
I've been called worse by better people...
You're confused on how it all actually works. I'm guessing you'd prefer to stay confused so can continue pitching your false narrative?
I have three kids in college right now...their black friends go to school on full ride grants...they are not paying their tuitions. One of my daughters black friends who comes from a semi wealthy family is attending a 24k per year university for only 6k out of pocket and she has a 0% .gov loan for that.
What else can I teach you?
Yes 3% is greater than .25%.So you think 3% is greater than25%?figuresMore moved to lower income.How much is a quarter percentage vs 3%? Which is more?What? Members of the middle class are disappearing? Alien abductions maybe?
Or they are simply becoming more prosperous? And moving from the middle class to the upper class?
Ummm... that's supposed to be a good thing, isn't it?
What exactly is the problem here?
Or, could it be that, as prosperity spreads, people are realizing they don't need liberals any more? And maybe they never did? So the strength of liberals (and the Democrat party) is shrinking?
Again, why is that a problem?
From link
Only about a quarter of a percent of US households have climbed up the ladder from the middle class into the upper-income bracket since 2000, according to the latest review by the IMF. Meanwhile, more than 3% of middle-income households have moved into the low-income bracket.
That's a flip from the trend between 1970 and 2000, where middle-income households were more likely to move upward.
All I see is signs claiming, One Way. Normal market volatility is simply, special pleading and a fallacy.Links or it is just, right wing fantasy.Obama's economic record. Increased poverty, decreased family income, tremendous debt, increased income disparity and never even one year when the growth rate didn't even get to 3%, which is historically dismal.
WTF, do your own homework.
The person making a claim should be the one to provide backup obviously.
That's a two way street.
Only in the mind of an idiot is a full 3% smaller than just a quarter of 1%. Bet you are happy to get a quarter percent raise each year.Hahahaha dude 3% is .03, 25% is .25. You need to go to schoolYes 3% is greater than .25%.So you think 3% is greater than25%?figuresMore moved to lower income.How much is a quarter percentage vs 3%? Which is more?From link
Only about a quarter of a percent of US households have climbed up the ladder from the middle class into the upper-income bracket since 2000, according to the latest review by the IMF. Meanwhile, more than 3% of middle-income households have moved into the low-income bracket.
That's a flip from the trend between 1970 and 2000, where middle-income households were more likely to move upward.
I won't say it that way because Aries paid for her education out of HER own pocket, not daddy's.Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.Brown v BOE was 1954, boy.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Just another catch 22 to keep the poor poor and the rich rich.
I've been called worse by better people...
You're confused on how it all actually works. I'm guessing you'd prefer to stay confused so can continue pitching your false narrative?
I have three kids in college right now...their black friends go to school on full ride grants...they are not paying their tuitions. One of my daughters black friends who comes from a semi wealthy family is attending a 24k per year university for only 6k out of pocket and she has a 0% .gov loan for that.
What else can I teach you?
That dumb bitch argues from a point of equal results while claiming it's about equal opportunity. She's the kind that if the results aren't the same, it can't be anything else but a lack of opportunity. It's the mindset of someone had to have been cheated if they don't have what someone else has.
I have one in college now for which the remainder of the costs is something I pay for out of pocket. I will have one starting next year for which the same thing will apply if I pay any at all. When they had opportunities, they took them. When those that Aries say didn't have the same chances she really means they didn't use the opportunities they had. She just won't say it that way.
I won't say it that way because Aries paid for her education out of HER own pocket, not daddy's.Regardless of your out of touch opinions on American history, you can not argue blacks and whites have equal opportunity at higher education as it now costs a small fortune to pay for it.Really, not long ago at all. Also I am a woman.
Long enough for the EXCUSE of my great, great, great, great granddaddy that I never knew was a slave to no longer be valid. I sat in classes with blacks that had the same things I did AFTER either date. If they want to say they didn't get the same chances I got, it's an E.
You're not a woman. You're a two bit bitch.
Just another catch 22 to keep the poor poor and the rich rich.
I've been called worse by better people...
You're confused on how it all actually works. I'm guessing you'd prefer to stay confused so can continue pitching your false narrative?
I have three kids in college right now...their black friends go to school on full ride grants...they are not paying their tuitions. One of my daughters black friends who comes from a semi wealthy family is attending a 24k per year university for only 6k out of pocket and she has a 0% .gov loan for that.
What else can I teach you?
That dumb bitch argues from a point of equal results while claiming it's about equal opportunity. She's the kind that if the results aren't the same, it can't be anything else but a lack of opportunity. It's the mindset of someone had to have been cheated if they don't have what someone else has.
I have one in college now for which the remainder of the costs is something I pay for out of pocket. I will have one starting next year for which the same thing will apply if I pay any at all. When they had opportunities, they took them. When those that Aries say didn't have the same chances she really means they didn't use the opportunities they had. She just won't say it that way.
What lucky kids you have to get everything handed to them...
