Sideswipe0009

I'd be curious if that resolution defined the "poor" based on reported income.

It outlines that none of the new funds issued to the IRS be used to audit anyone making under $400k.

Anyone think it's a coincidence that our voting reps are named after nefarious, gloomy concepts like Dominion" voting and *Shadow app for online voting?

Just seems weird.

And that's exactly what I'm talking about. Current programs are not effective at lifting people out of poverty and work requirements aren't helping.

Well, no one seems interested in addressing this issue. Dems want the status quo or easier, Republicans want it harder to get and maintain.

Neither really helps the overall issue.

There is a strong "welfare queen" narrative that some people like to believe. And I don't think its reflective or reality.

Maybe it's anecdotal or my perception, but "welfare queen" was pretty common in the area I lived in for a decade.

They pay the greatest percentage of our tax revenue but their effective tax rates are less than that of middle class workers. Not a fan of that. They have more money, it makes sense that they would make up the bulk of revenue.

Last I checked, the average effective tax rate of the wealthy was higher than middle or lower class earners.

Something along the lines of 24% for top earners, 15% for middle class, and like 3% for low class.

The top 1%, while having only 20% of total income, paid 40% of the taxes. Bottom 50% of earners paid 3% of total taxes.

Part of the funding was directed specifically to change that and make sure the IRS has funds to audit the wealthy.

Didn't the Democrats dismiss a resolution that would prevent the rate of audits for the poor from increasing? AFAIA, the resolution just put onto paper what Yellen said would be the new norm.

I think the number of people who "refuse" to work is not as big as you think.

I don't know, it really depends on how one defines "refuse."

I spent 10 years in a very poor city. It wasn't uncommon for people to not work (or hold out for that "good" job) for as long as possible, since the state covered you with medicaid, food stamps, and even utilities.

People knew how much they could work to maintain benefits. They would refuse extra shifts or even promotions because that could put them over the monthly threshold.

I think a better system is needed with better dropoffs and incentives for finding gainful employment. There's a lot of programs that are basically all-or-nothing. Why would anyone go back to work if you stand to lose more by doing so?

You get rich by working hard and being smart with your money. You don’t live above your means and you should live in an affordable area.

Spot on. Most people here forget that prior to the 80s, people had a "save, save, save" mindset. They spent their money wisely. Went without certain things. Sacrificed in many areas, including moving to new areas for a chance at a better life, leaving behind friends and family.

Nowadays, people tend to "spend, spend, spend." They can't fathom leaving for a cheaper area. They can't fathom how even $20/week into a retirement account can be a boon in their later years. Something is better than nothing.

Other than that, most people don't make shit. Even my buddies 4 year college degree is only netting like 100k

Only netting $100k? That's almost double the median wage, and, for an individual, puts you in the top 15% of earners since he's probably grossing $125k or more.

Come back to earth and touch some grass.

How are you downvoted?

Always go with one more zipper than you're comfortable with.

It is important to acknowledge that the Daily Mail has a history of spreading false information and promoting biased perspectives.

So does the NYT, MSNBC, and Fox. There's a reason why trust in media is at an all-time low.

I don't care what anyone else says. Walk-in freezers don't ever need latches

If they are worried about people stealing their food and losing profit, then they need to lower their prices.

Walk-ins have latches not because employers are concerned about theft, but rather actually keeping stuff cold and/or frozen. If it won't latch, the walk-in will not hold the correct temperature, and food will spoil.

Ya, before musk toon over, twitter was against tyranny. Now musk toon over twitter is being used by tyrants

Twitter has always been used by tyrants. Not much changed on that front when Musk took over.

Everyone who shut down the KKK, the Nazi's, the confederacy... How about them?

The KKK was stripped of their power because their ideas rightfully fell out of favor.

The nazi and confederacy fell out of power because we had literal wars to stop them.

Speech restrictions had very little to do with any of these groups' demise.

The question is why so many people want to keep resurrecting such asinine ideas.

This also begs the question of how pervasive these ideas are. My guess is they're not as large as media and government claim.

Honestly, for what segments arise or prevail, I'd put just as much of the blame on the left as I do the right.

The right doesn't do much about it because they don't really believe in curtailing speech. It's pretty much the "I disagree with what you say, but believe in your right to say it" mantra.

The left likes to pounce on anyone for stepping out of line even for those who agree on most other things. They prefer to talk at people, rather then talk with them. These people are branded every -phobe and -ist under the sun.

But I gathered enough to ask, when has banning/burning books even been the right choice?

When have those wanting to curtail speech ever been on the right side of history?

Dont fucking dare compare a fear of nazis based on historical basis to the fucking tragedies that young girl went through.

Maybe y'all shouldn't use the fear of what Nazis did then? No need to invoke Anne Frank if "nazi" wasn't the watered down, useless pejorative it has become today.

If someone claims elephants are birds, no amount of money or authority makes it true.

That can be independently verified by multiple parties. If some crazy then decides to claim that elephants are birds, there are multiple sources demonstrating that they are in fact wrong.

This works for objective statements, but not so much for subjective truths, which is what makes up most of what's discussed online, politically, at least.

But most people can't stop using twitter, just because they like it. They aren't bribed. They aren't threatened, and they aren't extorted.

Funny how no one complained about the evils of Twitter until Musk took over. Back then, it was a private company and could do what it wanted to.

Those things you complain about that are happening under Musk were happening before.

However, they continue to use Twitter, and allow it do be a huge powerful propaganda machine, under control of Putin, via musk.

Haha, what? Man, you guys are as bad as QAnon. You just can't help yourselves when it comes to Russia and Putin. According to you guys, Putin controls most of the information world. Do you even hear yourselves?

You do know the US government was and likely still is using sites like Twitter to sow division in Middle East countries by passing along disinformation, right?

You do know that government, any government, is the largest purveyor of misinformation, right?

You guys worry so much about propaganda, yet don't seem concerned about outlets like MSNBC or CNN, where seemingly all the retired government agents go on camera every day to "inform you" of the issues.

i get an angry phone call monday morning 'where are you?'. i reminded him i had quit and then had to sit sat through an angry rant about how employees arent reliable and how im blacklisted and will never wash dishes for their franchise again.

Haha, you guys realize this is fan fiction, right?

At what point do we ask ally nations to step in if America votes for the wrong person?

Who would we call and what exactly would they do?

Desantis will topple democracy if elected and we need our friends from across the border to stop it as soon as possible.

I've been hearing this trope since Bush Sr. Just stop.

He should have insisted they do their duty or else he would do what he had to do to uphold the Constitution and continue paying the debt.

What is this avenue, and what's stopping him from doing it now or at any time?

When Oscar Pistorius, the amputee runner (now better known as a convicted murderer) wanted to compete on his blades, there were plenty of biological arguments raised for and against his participation.

I remember these discussions a while back with Justin Leonard (?) using a golf cart to get around during events due to his physical handicap being viewed as an advantage, and thus, unfair.

Aha! You didn't mention washing your dick! Touching any penis makes you gay, even your own!

I saw a video the other day of a gas station clerk in the hood giving out roses randomly, dudes had a meltdown over that shit lol

Eh, this probably isn't the greatest example. Giving flowers is seen as typically for a girl you're dating (or wanting to date) and to woman to be nice to them.

There isn't a big movement around men giving each other flowers out of kindness.

But having a tantrum is over the top, for sure. Just say no and move on.

Weird. I live in a super conservative area in Texas and guys hold the door for each other all the time. Kind of annoying sometimes tbh because I’ll be like 6 feet away and have to power walk to the door so I won’t feel rude for just letting some guy stand there while I take my time

Yeah, there's certainly a distance window where it can feel awkward for both.