When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
So I've already read countless articles blaming gun control and white supremacy for the shootings, several of them scoffing at other potential causes. Yet amazingly, only The Independent happened to cover this tidbit:
"Payton Gendron, 18, who has been charged with murder over the Buffalo shooting, had previously threatened to shoot up his high school and was taken into custody for a mental health evaluation, an anonymous law enforcement source told Associated Press.In 2021, the then-17-year-old talked about committing a shooting at Susquehanna Valley Central High School in Broome County, New York."
Glad to see all those existing mental health programs and background checks are working so well. I sure hope Joe gives a gibberish-laden speech insisting we implement more of them.
What if people that live in traditionally blue counties have higher average incomes because the companies that they work for have to compete harder to retain talent, and they have to pay an additional premium to pay people to live in a populated place where those people have to compete for a finite amount of living space? It seems to me that the total wage payment must necessarily be higher in urban areas.
What if people living in traditionally red counties, with typically far lower costs for housing, tended to earn a lower nominal income than those living in the blue counties, yet had a higher perceived standard of living than those earning more income who lived in blue counties? It seems to me that your earned dollar goes somewhat farther when you can buy a ranch home on two acres only five minutes outside of town for one third the price of the same sized two-story building on a postage stamp only five minutes outside of downtown.
What if governments were totally blind to the discrepancies of cost of living across rural versus urban counties, as well as the fact that where a person lives typically is by choice within only a few years of graduating high school, and because of that, what if the government allocated "free" funding for social programs based solely on fixed targets of taxable income. It seems to me the government would be conveying far more benefit to a "low-income" person living in a rural area than to a "low-income" person living in urban area with the same quantity of dollars.
I suggest that a "not insignificant" amount of government "assistance" is sent to people living in red/rural areas not because those people are objectively poorer, but because the numbers they report to the IRS are typically lower.
What if the government were to stop increasing competition among "low-income" people through grants of economic "value" with which to compete with each other?
as well as the fact that where a person lives typically is by choice within only a few years of graduating high school,
Boy, wouldn't it be nice if that were true? I sure as heck wouldn't be living in Chicago if it were.
I guess you could argue that I am choosing to live in Chicago by not accepting the alternative, which is to work as the manager of a Cinnabon in northern Utah. And while it's true that I could make that choice, I find it hard to believe that you'd consider it to be a rational one for me.
There are certainly some careers in which you have a high degree of freedom to choose where you want to live, and be able to find good employment within your chosen field in that place. Nurses, teachers, mechanics, electricians, these people all have career portability.
I envy them sometimes.
Doctors, dentists, lawyers, and other sorts of folks are in a similar situation to myself. Ok, the ones in private practice get to choose where they want to be initially, but after that they're stuck.
Originally Posted by fooger03
What if the government were to stop
Really, you could just end the question right there. Ask "What if the government were to stop doing (x)", and here in 21st century America, with only a few exceptions, the answer is universally "that would be a good thing," regardless of what (x) is.
What if people living in traditionally red counties, with typically far lower costs for housing, tended to earn a lower nominal income than those living in the blue counties, yet had a higher perceived standard of living than those earning more income who lived in blue counties? It seems to me that your earned dollar goes somewhat farther when you can buy a ranch home on two acres only five minutes outside of town for one third the price of the same sized two-story building on a postage stamp only five minutes outside of downtown.
I Wish I had time to go into the entirety of your comment but I don't so I'm just going to address this bit here.
I think this is dead wrong. Everything except for taxes and houses costs about the same in a city vs rural. With that in mind, the luxuries in life cost a lower % of total income for someone in the city. Up to a certain point a house is a house their value is very similar even if their price isn't. The random bullshit that makes life nice and fun is disproportionately priced for rural people.
6 or 7 years ago, a media buyer that I worked with put me onto ADCONTRARIAN.COM , by a guy named Bob Hoffman, because she thought his insights about the ad business were interesting/amusing. Even back then, he tried to convince the world that an overwhelming majority of the online “eyeballs” that ad revenue is based on were actually robots. That’s exactly what Musk is suggesting - that the value of Twitter is based on an active-user base that isn’t really there. He’s fortunate enough to be able to afford saying that the emperor has no clothes.
Anyway, this clip reminded me about Hoffman. I hadn’t read his posts in a long time, but he is an interesting read. His last post is pretty damning.
So, Fauci has told us exactly how to get rid of him.
We are now faced with an unenviable choice: Is removing Fauci from office worth a second Trump term? Before answering, consider the effect that four more years of Trump will have in deepening the divide among the electorate, and creating yet more hysteria and screaming in the public discourse.
6 or 7 years ago, a media buyer that I worked with put me onto ADCONTRARIAN.COM , by a guy named Bob Hoffman, because she thought his insights about the ad business were interesting/amusing. Even back then, he tried to convince the world that an overwhelming majority of the online “eyeballs” that ad revenue is based on were actually robots. That’s exactly what Musk is suggesting - that the value of Twitter is based on an active-user base that isn’t really there. He’s fortunate enough to be able to afford saying that the emperor has no clothes.
Anyway, this clip reminded me about Hoffman. I hadn’t read his posts in a long time, but he is an interesting read. His last post is pretty damning.
Good old Rush Limbaugh found the same thing. He said his team investigated and the thousands of angry tweets--most with the same verbiage--came from the same nine guys who lived their mom's basement. Advertisers pulled their commercials based on these clowns, and Musk seems to be exposing the clown show, just like Limbaugh.
So, Fauci has told us exactly how to get rid of him.
We are now faced with an unenviable choice: Is removing Fauci from office worth a second Trump term? Before answering, consider the effect that four more years of Trump will have in deepening the divide among the electorate, and creating yet more hysteria and screaming in the public discourse.
I think Biden has done a wonderful job of bringing us all together...../endsarc. Trump saw massive gains with black, latino, women voters, which is a continuing trend. He reached out to historically black colleges and funded them long-term, had the lowest unemployment rate for minorities of any president in the last 100 years, and raised the wages and standard of living of the middle class more than any president in memory, while taking more people out of poverty than any president. Oh, and no wars and Middle East peace happened with Trump, while I haven't heard of the term "ISIS" in years since Trump wiped them out. I've got NO PROBLEM calling him El Jefe again.
Before answering, consider the effect that four more years of Trump will have in deepening the divide among the electorate, and creating yet more hysteria and screaming in the public discourse.
Why do you act like it's Trump's fault that leftists are unhinged?
The hysteria created by the left in response to Trump's election is why the Democrats now hold a majority in both houses of Congress, and why we have Biden / Harris in the White House. And it could have been worse- Sanders came a lot closer to winning the Democratic primary than any non-socialist should be comfortable with.
The hysteria created by the left in response to Trump's election is why the Democrats now hold a majority in both houses of Congress, and why we have Biden / Harris in the White House. And it could have been worse- Sanders came a lot closer to winning the Democratic primary than any non-socialist should be comfortable with.
81 million right?
The left always creates division and blames it on the right.
CDC Tracked Millions of Phones to See If Americans Followed COVID Lockdown Orders
Newly released documents showed the CDC planned to use phone location data to monitor schools and churches, and wanted to use the data for many non-COVID-19 purposes, too.
Tell me more about "division", Joe. One way to bring a country together is to simply ruin it and send all our money to shady foreign governments as kickbacks.
05-16-2022, 08:39 AM
1
Before answering, consider the effect that four more years of Trump will have in deepening the divide among the electorate, and creating yet more hysteria and screaming in the public discourse.
