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.
In this thread, we are talking about millions of people who don't drink, do drugs, and don't have criminal (beyond traffic tickets) records. We're talking about good people who are old, and no longer in the workforce with the high incomes they used to have. THAT 'real world". Get it ?What the heck does "due to unequal protection of the law for unemployment compensation" even mean?
Under what theory should any country not have anyone living below the poverty line or homeless? Because we are a rich nation, how does that translate to a country without anyone with alcohol, drug, or criminal records?
Please stop being so silly. Join the real world.
In this thread, we are talking about millions of people who don't drink, do drugs, and don't have criminal (beyond traffic tickets) records. We're talking about good people who are old, and no longer in the workforce with the high incomes they used to have. THAT 'real world". Get it ?
I was talking about them seeing tent cities, and the normal garbage that builds up when there are hundreds of people living on the street.Tourists rarely see how much rent is.
It might have been if so many blue states didn't have laws against that. Most do.
I mean "high" relative to what they now get from Social Security + maybe small pension. As for your word "save", many people's incomes (all their lives) have never been large enough to "save" anything. you sound like somebody who hasn't had much experience seeing poverty or just very low income living.So these people used to have high incomes? And they made no preparations for their retirement? Didn't save any money? Their only plan was to rely on the gov't to take care of them? hate to break it to you, but that kind of thinking is NOT conservative.
What is right about banning rent control ? It's about as WRONG as anything any state government ever did. If your rent just went from $550/mo to $900/mo, and your whole income was less than $1200/mo, you'd see how wrong it is.Blue states did something right? Crazy!
What is right about banning rent control ? It's about as WRONG as anything any state government ever did. If your rent just went from $550/mo to $900/mo, and your whole income was less than $1200/mo, you'd see how wrong it is.
Letting prices soar on luxuries is one thing. Letting that happen on NECESSITIES is something alltogether different. If business owners want to be fully free from price controls, they should enter businesses that don't deal with things people HAVE TO HAVE.
I was talking about them seeing tent cities, and the normal garbage that builds up when there are hundreds of people living on the street.
I mean "high" relative to what they now get from Social Security + maybe small pension. As for your word "save", many people's incomes (all their lives) have never been large enough to "save" anything. you sound like somebody who hasn't had much experience seeing poverty or just very low income living.
I remember when I lived in East Tennessee, talking to some people there who said they did not own a pair of shoes until they were 8 years old. Some guys from Appalachia who I served in the Army with, (when getting their uniforms at the reception center), said "This is the best set of clothes I've ever had." They didn't rely on the government for it. They just got it, that's all.
As you know, retail sales are soaring, as is the stock market because of the trillions of worthless paper dollars being pumped into the economy, throwing gas on the fire of inflation.I said (in Post # 1391) >> " Every other business outside of the housing sector, who are seeing plummeting sales, because of the massive reduction in disposable income"
The last people this thread needs to hear from are rotten realtors who are the cause of all this misery.
Then your Realtor and/or lender did a terrible job for you. Either that or it was decades ago and there were substantial discount points. Today we rarely see discount points. As you know, the VA funding fee can be included in the mortgage amount.I applied for a VA home loan. I was told I would have ZERO down payment. And my CLOSING COSTS on a house of only $60,000, were $7,000 - UP FRONT. That's not including tax & insurance.
That would leave fewer than 10% of the homeless we have today. Very few indeed. Get it?In this thread, we are talking about millions of people who don't drink, do drugs, and don't have criminal (beyond traffic tickets) records. We're talking about good people who are old, and no longer in the workforce with the high incomes they used to have. THAT 'real world". Get it ?
You need to look up all the words and put them in context.What the heck does "due to unequal protection of the law for unemployment compensation" even mean?
The Majestic equality of the Law.Under what theory should any country not have anyone living below the poverty line or homeless? Because we are a rich nation, how does that translate to a country without anyone with alcohol, drug, or criminal records?
Please stop being so silly. Join the real world.
The Majestic equality of the Law.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
― Anatole France
The police should be telling the People (and the EDD) to be Legal to the Law and get off the streets.And we have programs that are designed to help those who are poor, and unable to help themselves. Welfare, foodstamps, ect.
The police should be telling the People (and the EDD) to be Legal to the Law and get off the streets.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
― Anatole France
All procedural and substantive due process should effect that Majestic goal.
Why do you believe that, other than appealing to ignorance that is detrimental to the Poor? Not enough morals to go around on the Right-Wing?Be legal to the law? lol
We are being legal to the law. We are also legal where the US Constitution is concerned. There is no requirement for UC to be changed due to a law that is merely a description of a relationship between employer and employee.
Why do you believe that, other than appealing to ignorance that is detrimental to the Poor? Not enough morals to go around on the Right-Wing?
Sure, if you do nothing but appeal to ignorance of the Law for Legal purposes.I believe that because there is not one iota of evidence to the contrary.
My morality is fine. So is my sense of duty.
