ThreePointTakedown

Yes. It was done in bad faith. Undercutting a bill that was already passed to identify tax cheats. It will wind up costing tax payers more money if it passes. How is that a good idea? When it passes in its current form(doubtful), you can gloat about it. But you're spiking the ball a little early in the process. That's all.

They have a majority in the house. That's all it takes. If its not signed by the Pres then its just a stunt. I have a feeling the IRS part will be cut out.

So in your inaccurate post, you just wanted to insult a group of people you happen to disagree with. By using a slur that you wouldn't say out loud in public. Or maybe you would. Either way, classy.

Of course not. You don't have a right to own a specific type of arm. And really you shouldn't be able to bear an arm unless you're in a well regulated militia. But textualists might say that in the time when that document was written, assault-style rifles didn't exist. So you have no right to own those anyway. But those are not the same issues.

So, that's your answer? How does her age and length of time in congress make you feel?

Should the healthcare industry and the health insurance industries be for-profit organizations? Able to sell stock? Pay out dividends? Be motivated by profit for investors over quantity and quality of service? Utility companies too? Not charities but less of an incentive for profit over progress for their customers.

Why? Granted she won't be there for much longer. I admit getting new blood in congress is important but she's done a great job. Which I feel might be one of your concerns, deep down.

All models are wrong but some have value. Do all his social media posts reflect his current opinions on the issues? Probably not. Then he should address them or be open to being questioned about them. Because a guy who was all but invisible a few weeks ago is now second in line to be President, he should be more then willing to be open and honest about where he falls on the issues. Will he? Probably not. They're not huge on honesty, despite being christian.

Is it a good thing to have strong conviction in a belief? Might that make you less likely to be open to changing your mind if/when new or contradictory information is presented as true?

Granted, power/utility companies have incentive to do things that are mandated by law. If those changed, there could be a boone as far as upgrading the grid at a parallel clip to the adoption of EVs, solar, wind, thermal, tidal power etc. But ya, they kinda suck at present. Like oil companies, they have incentive to keep things the way they are because it can be planned for. Status quo is reliably profitable. Other nuclear: what i meant was MSRs(Molten Salt Reactors). They can made much smaller, with less chance of catastrophic meltdown/accidents. Kinda cool idea that's been around for decades. Might be worth looking in to. The NIMBY crowd will always be loud. But ideas that can be a benefit should be pursued vigorously. I'll keep it up.

Straw man: you've created a scenario that is easy to defeat in order to bolster your point. Do ALL no-fault divorces fall within the scope of your scenario? No. So it is disingenuous for you to site it as a legitimate reason to oppose the thing, across the board. This is the same as the late term abortion argument. If you have stat of how many people just peace out on their spouse and kids because they feel like it. I'd love to see it. But I feel that 'rosy' picture you've painted is a very small segment of the pie that your are grasping on to. In a desperate attempt to make your point sound more appealing. Hearsay is not usually admissible. Guilting someone into staying in a situation where they are unhappy when an alternative is easily accessible and preferable, is abusive and traumatic. Seems like you're perfectly fine being responsible for that. Not sure the people living with similar trauma would be so keen to join you.

The plural of anecdote is not data. You can't or shouldn't extrapolate your small set of data points to the whole population. Its irresponsible and a bit lazy. Makes you feel good, but that's not the point.

Its just a contract with the local, state, and federal government. Is the name that important? We currently have a name for it. Why change it if the THING isn't fundamentally changing?

Yes, if ALL of those things happen then power will stop flowing. If the grid is upgraded(don't get me started on power companies and their motivations/reasoning for making upgrades to the power grid) to a sufficient extent and the power is supplied from a large number of sources(ie, home solar, wind, sea, maybe go back to nuclear like you said before but different then in the past, or any one of a number of other things that are in the works) that scenario will likely never play out. Right now the risk is not spread very evenly. So it could be more prone to failure(looking at you Texas). As in all things if it is accepted then it could very well replace a staple of our current economy. Some companies don't want to see that happen. Those motivations may not be in the best interest of the country or the world.

Granted, fuel economy and safety has improved immensely. https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1237-may-9-2022-fuel-economy-all-vehicle-classes-has-improved We are traveling nearly twice as far on the same amount of gas. That it will be difficult product to replace is a testament to how much it has advanced and how good it really is. If our infrastructure and economy can adapt to EVs the way it did with ICEs and then we see the big jump that we saw in fuel economy(like the leaps they are predicting with solid state batteries, TODAY!), then the ICE will be nothing but a memory for kids alive today. Also, the fuel cell stuff. Great technology. Lots of possibilities. What did the guy say in Armageddon? Wouldn't trust some with a potato gun let alone a nuclear car.

Typically a new thing that doesn't yet, but could potentially make change for the better, is set at a price point that mostly wealthy people could buy. Or someone who feels a sense of duty, obligation, ambition, or patriotism makes a financial sacrifice to buy that new thing. If the market deems it a worthy investment the prices go down as the new thing is improved upon. Making it a benefit to more and more people. ICE cars are a great example of that. Steel. Computers. Cell phones. And the people that fear the world that might be if these things take off, always say the same things that you're saying and usually for the same reasons. Care to tell us yours?

Should perfect be the enemy of the good? Keeping us from doing anything.

A foundation funded by Exxon, says electric cars are bad? Shocking. Next at 9, dog chases cat. DoE says an average of $.16 /kWh equates to about $60/month. Who would have a bigger incentive to lie? A company that has financial interest in oil or a government with no financial interest in EVs. Only a 'supposed' interest in the environment.

Whataboutism doesn't offer solutions. Just kicking the can down the road. Making people more tribal. The situation in south west asia is a similar situation. Both responsible for violence that shouldn't be tolerated let alone carried out. But still happened. How to fix/prevent it, for next time? ... and go!

I'm sorry you have political leans that would have you say something so stupid. Or are just a troll that needs your fix. When you, eventually, realize how far down the rabbit hole you went and are trying to come back, let us know. We can help.

It doesn't seem like you have any intention of being honest. Because those aren't dog whistles. The false, and it is false, claims that the election was illegitimated need to be proven before it is true. It hasn't. So it is false. A dog whistle is coded language. Those weren't coded they were fact. I am sorry that you can't wrap your head around that. But its done and won't be undone as much as you wish it could. Don't listen to this blowhard, he has nothing of substance or that of reality to say. Allowing women to have bank accounts, have the medical care they need, freedom to leave a partner if they so choose has been overwhelmingly good things. He's going to try to convince you other wise by asking car-tuck questions but that's all they are. They have no substance or facts to back them up. Just conjecture and a longing for Gilead. If he actually believed any of this he'd do research and prove his point but he can't.

What are false about those things? If its just your opinion, it can't be true or false. I can just say 'nu uh' like you've been doing this whole time.

Doesn't seem like we are having the same conversation. Of course you'd guess, rather then asking. But I'll bet in a country with a population that size I'll bet there are plenty of people that practice a religion. But if you're saying that N. Korea is like us in that there is no official religion, you might be right. Do you disagree that we have an official religion? Are you familiar with the goings on in N. Korea? Doesn't seem so.

If you are just going to avoid answering the question, fine. Nothing I can do about that. But practicing isn't the question, its how expression is chilled by the support or lack of support from the government. An entity that can imprison you, or worse, if it so chooses. When government supports a religion or several religions, but not all, that is discrimination. You see that when governments want to put a religious image or icon on public property. When other religions or organizations sue to have theirs included, they either have to include something from every organization with the resources to raise a fuss(not all of them, mind you) or discontinue support of that original project. Either way it chills speech/expression because government support does that and is a violation of the rights of every citizen. Not just the supporters of that religion.

Which country(ies) would you most want the USA to reflect with regards to religion and government?