The Supreme Court Ruled in Favor of the First Amendment! (Page 3/4)
rinselberg JUL 02, 04:36 PM

quote
Originally posted by Wichita:

The reason why leftist ran governments make places **** -holes, because leftists are vulnerable narcissists who view their own shortcomings as the most important suffering in the world.

The problem with that mindset is the priorities of resources are not allocated logically to where it can benefit people.

For example they think spending millions on sex reassignment surgeries for fetishized dysphoric leftist males is more important than water treatment for clean water.

We can go on and one from crime to economic development, nothing they do really is logical.

For example the luxury belief that giving college students with debt a handout with debt forgiveness, but never thinking about why they are in debt in the first place and what to do about it in the future. Spend $500 billion to give to loan companies so that leftist and mostly white college kids can make fewer payments, when the same amount could literally lift 330 million people out of poverty. Yes, an equivalent to the entire population of the USA, instead it's a handout to college graduates millennials who have an unemployment rate less than 2% and make on a average 3X the US poverty level standard.


There might be some truth in this statement, but let me start with the sentence that I singled out with boldface.

Are people with gender dysphoria "fetishized dysphoric leftist males"..? Are all people with gender dysphoria "fetishized dysphoric leftist males"..? Or just some of those people?

This comes from the same forum member who was just hoodwinked by one of the little "dumbs" that is circulating on his favored social media network(s).
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/...HTML/000759.html#p39

As far as "leftists" prioritizing gender reassignment surgeries over clean water... I'm not sure how Wichita comes to that conclusion.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which has "Democrats" and "President Biden" tattooed all over it (so to speak). This is on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's website:

quote
The nation has underinvested in water infrastructure for too long. Insufficient water infrastructure threatens America’s security, and it risks people’s health, jobs, peace of mind, and future prosperity. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law delivers more than $50 billion to EPA to improve our nation’s drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure - the single largest investment in water that the federal government has ever made.


That statement from the EPA continues with this:

quote
$11.7 billion to the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF).

$15 billion to the Drinking Water SRF for Lead Service Line Replacement.

$4 billion to the Drinking Water SRF for Emerging Contaminants.

$5 billion to Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Grants to address emerging contaminants.

There are still 6 to 10 million lead services lines in cities and towns across the country, many of which are in communities of color and low-income neighborhoods. Because of the investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, millions of American families will no longer have to fear the harmful health effects caused by lead and other pollutants in their water. People will be protected from PFAS or “forever chemical” contamination and investing in our water infrastructure will put Americans to work in good-paying jobs.

https://www.epa.gov/infrast...tructure-investments

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was enacted in November of 2021. It was followed in August of 2022 by the Democrats and Biden-backed Inflation Reduction Act:

quote
As everyone has heard by now, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a really big deal. In a sweeping motion to turn inflation reduction into green policy, the act grants $369 billion toward climate, $10 billion of which is targeted at water, including drought relief, flood mitigation and climate resiliency, and domestic water infrastructure. It's encouraging to see these two ideas linked - that the path to inflation reduction is through clean energy independence, and the decarbonization of our economy. That the IRA puts the U.S. on a path to a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 is a serious win for the planet, and for US environmental policy.

https://www.burntislandvent...er%20in frastructure.

That's the beginning of an assessment from Marissa Sterling for Burnt Island Ventures, which is an investment fund that specializes in backing startups and projects that benefit the national water resource.

If you can square this record with the assertion by Wichita that "[leftists] think spending millions on sex reassignment surgeries for fetishized dysphoric leftist males is more important than water treatment for clean water,", than you probably disagree with the findings of the world's most peer-reviewed climate researchers, even though the sum total of your knowledge about that is "Greta Thunberg". You probably think that it makes sense to encapsulate the rally of American Nazi sympathizers at New York City's Madison Square Garden in 1939, well remembered by history, as a "gathering of leftists"—even though you have no actual idea of the various kinds of people that were in on this. You're probably such a "simp" that you think that a few reports in the Science section of various news publications that used the "catchy" (but not perfectly serious) banner of "cockroach milk more nutritious than cows milk" translated to "scientists want to replace dairy farmers with cockroach breeders". And the other day, you were probably hoodwinked by... oh wait, I already said that one.

Having vitiated ("disemboweled") this latest feckless assertion by the LGBT-obsessed Wichita, that "[leftists] think spending millions on sex reassignment surgeries for fetishized dysphoric leftist males is more important than water treatment for clean water," let me add insult to injury by providing a report about Republicans Nancy Mace and Tommy Tuberville, who have just been caught promoting federally funded infrastructure projects for their constituents—a grant to electrify the Charleston Transit Authority's bus fleet (Mace) and Internet broadband (Tuberville)—even though Nancy Mace and Tommy Tuberville are both on record as having voted against the Democrats and Biden-backed legislation that provided the federal funding for these projects.

Nancy Mace and Tommy Tuberville, promoting these infrastructure projects and clearly trying to mislead their constituents with the oxymoronic idea that they deserve credit, even though they voted against the legislation.

Nancy Mace derided the legislation as "socialism" when she voted against it, but now it seems that a little "socialism" (in her own district) is actually a good thing, not a bad thing.

"Why Nancy Mace’s infrastructure hypocrisy was especially brazen"

quote
When it comes to Republicans seeking credit for infrastructure investments they opposed, there are nuances. Nancy Mace’s style of hypocrisy is the worst.


Steve Benen for MSNBC; June 29, 2022.
https://www.msnbc.com/rache...lly-brazen-rcna91820

These two Republican hypocrites were trying to bask in the glow of federally funded infrastructure projects—not clean water infrastructure, specifically, but other kinds of infrastructure—having voted against the legislation that funded it. Surely, the parallel is obvious, as it pertains to Wichita's assertion that "[leftists] think spending millions on sex reassignment surgeries for fetishized dysphoric leftist males is more important than water treatment for clean water."

You seldom hear from Wichita about the shortcomings or misdeeds of Republicans... only Democrats and "leftists", for the most part... the very most part.

He's not "real."

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-02-2023).]

fredtoast JUL 02, 04:56 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:These leftists just don't seem to understand how this works. And it's based entirely on MSM propaganda. The image above, this is illegal, and they can be sued for it. They are not allowed to deny people because of race, creed, religion, belief, etc. They are still required to sell to everyone (whatever it is this company sells). Like, I just do not understand why this is so difficult for people to get? The law is not complicated here.


Actually it is completely legal to discriminate against a person based on political beliefs. Political parties are not protected classes.

So, my previous examples about discriminating against the KKK and Nazis was not a very good one. Unless the KKK claims to be a religious organization it is perfectly legal to discriminate against them.

So it is completely legal to post a sign saying you refuse to serve Republicans or Trump supporters. A friend of mine runs The Bistro in Knoxville. She refused to serve Tim Burchett because of his political beliefs and there was nothing he could do about it.

You guys really don't understand the law very well around here. Lucky that you have me to educate you all properly.

[This message has been edited by fredtoast (edited 07-02-2023).]

fredtoast JUL 02, 05:10 PM

quote
Originally posted by Wichita:

Spend $500 billion to give to loan companies so that leftist and mostly white college kids can make fewer payments, when the same amount could literally lift 330 million people out of poverty.



$1200 would not lift anyone out of poverty.



quote
Originally posted by Wichita:
instead it's a handout to college graduates millennials who have an unemployment rate less than 2% and make on a average 3X the US poverty level standard.




You don't have the facts right here. A majority (57%) of people who have student loan debt never graduated. So this is not a handout to college graduates.

Someday try reading something that did not come from the rigth-wing media.. You seem to fall for every lie they tell.

[This message has been edited by fredtoast (edited 07-02-2023).]

82-T/A [At Work] JUL 03, 09:04 AM

quote
Originally posted by fredtoast:
You don't have the facts right here. A majority (57%) of people who have student loan debt never graduated. So this is not a handout to college graduates.

Someday try reading something that did not come from the rigth-wing media.. You seem to fall for every lie they tell.




I could find nothing that validated this statement. Do you have a link or something that shows that more than half of the people with outstanding student loan debt never graduated from school? The only thing I found was an article that stated it's more like 8-10%. It also stated that most of these were people who went to Community College. Having been a broke kid working at a hardware store with roommates paying for an apartment, I can attest to the fact that community college is cheap, I mean really cheap... even for someone who has a negative balance of 5 cents in their checking account (which I had many times as a young adult). I got a 2yr CompSCI in Community College and that's not really significant debt... even if you are broke AF.

More to that point, while trying to quantify your 57% (I couldn't find anything related to that percentage), I did find that more than 50% of the current outstanding student loan debt is from Masters / Graduate Degrees... of which this debt is held by a mere 24.8% of student loan holders. So... 25% of those taking out student loans hold more than 50% of the total student loan debt.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/0...ll-student-debt.html
fredtoast JUL 03, 12:12 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:


I could find nothing that validated this statement. Do you have a link or something that shows that more than half of the people with outstanding student loan debt never graduated from school? The only thing I found was an article that stated it's more like 8-10%.




Only took me 2 minutes with Google.

Of course I look at ALL sources instead of just rigth-wing propganda.

https://universitybusiness....wers-with-no-degree/

"According to a new analysis from OneClass 57% of students who take on debt for college don’t go on to graduate. The dropout rate for all students lands at 40%, meaning those who need loans drop out a lot more often than their non-borrowing peers.

The percentages of dropouts with student loan debt are close to the overall average for public colleges and universities/community colleges (56%) and for-profit colleges (59%). The percentage is a bit lower, 48%, for those who dropped out of private nonprofit colleges."


Makes perfect sense logically because it pretty much mirrors the overall drop out percentage. You would have to be a complete rube to believe that only 8-10% of people with student loan debt never got a degree when the overall drop out rate is around 60%

[This message has been edited by fredtoast (edited 07-03-2023).]

fredtoast JUL 03, 12:16 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
More to that point, while trying to quantify your 57% (I couldn't find anything related to that percentage), I did find that more than 50% of the current outstanding student loan debt is from Masters / Graduate Degrees... of which this debt is held by a mere 24.8% of student loan holders. So... 25% of those taking out student loans hold more than 50% of the total student loan debt.




And this is exactly why the forgiveness was limited to just the first $10K. That helps most of the people who never got degrees.
cliffw JUL 03, 02:46 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
I say, expand the number of Supreme Court justices from the current 9 to 13, and put an end to the lifetime tenure of Supreme Court justices... neither of which requires a Constitutional Amendment.



Remember when Harry Reid violated the nuclear option for appointing Federal Judges which he favored ? The other side exploded the nuclear option for Supreme Court Judges.

If you appoint more SC justices to get yo way, we will to.
rinselberg JUL 04, 06:28 PM

quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
Remember when Harry Reid violated the nuclear option for appointing Federal Judges which he favored ? The other side exploded the nuclear option for Supreme Court Judges.

If you appoint more SC justices to get yo way, we [sic] will to.


It's a canard to say, as has just been said, that I want to have more Supreme Court justices for the sake of moving the court's future deliberations and rulings in any particular direction.

More justices than the current nine, and term limits for the justices... an "Rx" for a better Supreme Court.

As far as the reasoning behind these recommendations, I invoke the arguments and analyses that are available online, Internet-style, through the familiar medium of the Internet Browser ethos, as the content that's accessible via the specific World Wide Web pages that I have already referenced... the "links" (hyperlinks or "http"s) that I have already posted.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-04-2023).]

82-T/A [At Work] JUL 05, 11:24 AM

quote
Originally posted by fredtoast:

Only took me 2 minutes with Google.

Of course I look at ALL sources instead of just rigth-wing propganda.





So, the only articles I found, all seem to link to this "study": https://oneclass.com/blog/f...r-graduate3F.en.html

Which they seem to base on information they say they get from US Department of Education. Nothing else seems to link to this, so my guess is that this information is being misrepresented. I say this because we also know that the vast majority of student loan debt is held by people who are seeking Masters / Graduate degrees. So again... using Bayesian principles, that would mean that the majority of the students who "drop out" with student loan debt are those who "didn't get a degree" ... meaning a Masters degree.

We all make bad decisions in life, I've tried to make the best decisions I can... but sometimes I screw up too. Part of learning how to be a responsible adult is learning to deal with life's challenges. You know what I think about the Democrat party, so I won't repeat that all here. But one of the issues I ALSO have with the Democrat party, is that they continue to "market" to potential voters by creating victim groups. They create problems ... for example, most of the student debt has come about from the nationalization of the student loans program under Obama in the early years of his presidency. This didn't solve any problem, but instead nearly eliminated competition and well... you have what you have now.

I really have no sympathy for people with student loan debt. Again, we all make bad decisions, and what makes us stronger is learning from them. You can sway me on things like health, or other things that often are not directly related to a person's behavior or decisions. But student loan debt... people need to pay it off and learn from their mistakes. But this is probably the most "vain" vote buying scheme I've ever seen (to date) from Democrats. Absolutely not my problem. I have 8 degrees, and I'm working on a 9th (another Masters). I paid for almost all of these out of pocket. Sorry... no sympathy.
fredtoast JUL 05, 11:49 AM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I say this because we also know that the vast majority of student loan debt is held by people who are seeking Masters / Graduate degrees. So again... using Bayesian principles, that would mean that the majority of the students who "drop out" with student loan debt are those who "didn't get a degree" ... meaning a Masters degree. .


Your logic fails because you are confusing "total student loan debt" with "total number of people with student loan debt". Your principles are sound, but you don't know how to use them.

We know that overall a majority of people who start college (not grad school) drop out (about 60%). Using Baysian principles with the proper facts we can conclude that a majority of people who had student loan debt did not get any type of degree at all.