The Right Side of the News

I know, but the term more accurately describes GOP economics. What products did he supply?Enjoy.

Close and fill all ground level spaces, convert the roads to canals a la Venice. Particularly appropriate for a town on the west coast of Florida ... cost wise probably about the same as rebuilding inland (and then having to do it again). Also add upper level enclosed automatic walkways & bikeways between buildings.Embrace the change.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

You have structural problems with waves that structures not designed for, filling them solves most of this. Will likely need to reinforce outer wall to be safe.Enjoy.

Nope.

quote:

---

https://thehill.com/...ion-broke-law-by-withholding-aid-from

​

The Trump administration’s decision to freeze the release of security assistance to Ukraine violated the law, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in a new report.

​

The independent watchdog said in an opinion issued Thursday that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld the appropriated funds last summer not as a programmatic delay but in order to advance the president’s own agenda.

​

By doing so, the watchdog concluded, the White House violated what’s known as the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).

​

Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law, the report said. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)...Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.

---

Independent, not partisan.Enjoy

see Message 305 on Cancer Survivors

Except he wasn't investigating corruption. He was not concerned with any investigation of corruption, just an announcement that Biden was being investigated ... and nobody else ... and then he released the funds without any document being provided clearing Ukraine or any of the other (several) excuses he had for holding the money.The only thing that occurred before the release of funds was the announcement of an investigation into his holding the funds. If he had any other reason than hustling Ukraine then he could have kept holding the funds.You do need to look at all the FACTS faith, not just what conforms to your beliefs.Amusing that there is now an investigation of this in the Ukraine to see if any Ukrainians participated in the corrupt efforts of Giuliani to create a false narrative and to get the Ambassador removed to make it easier for the corruption to proceed.Ukraine investigates prosecutor who gave Giuliani information on Biden | Ukraine | The GuardianAnd he is being investigated about here as wellGiuliani Is Said to Be Under Investigation for Ukraine Work - The New York TimesIt would be interesting to see him at the Senate impeachment hearing ... under oath ... it seems he is a central player in this matter.Enjoy.

Where was the judge and jury, the witesses, etc ...?Or do you mean like typical KKK Vigilanti type "justice"? Trumps obstruction of justice is/was worse than Clinton's, who actually allowed witnesses and documents to be viewed by the impeachment process. No Faith, it was obstruction of the articles in the constitution that give the House oversight of the President -- it's actually a worse charge than obstruction of justice, and it covers his refusal to allow witnesses or provided requested documents.The trial start tomorrow. We'll see how fair the Senate is, and how much they want to look at the truth.Enjoy

So no judge or jury. No, because that was handled through (a) the war on terror, (b) BinLaden was enemy terrorist #1 and (c) the National Defense Council authorized it. ThePresident got all the due process the Constitution requires. The Senate is where the REST of the process should occur. Looks like the republicans are making a mockery of it.Enjoy

Because he cut funding on food stamps, artificially lowering the number because fewer qualified.Unemployment down but how many people with multiple jobs getting counted twice for being employed, and how many jobs pay a living wage or better.If more people working multiple jobs to survive is unemployment the issue or underemployment?unemployment is the most manipulated figure and fails to measure the value of jobs.If unemployment is down AND the average value of jobs is down, the economy is not improving, it just means more people working starvation wages.Enjoy

Good riddance. Which they have not done with the tax refunds, so no loss there. Which they also have not done. Most job creation is done by small businesses, not corporations. Which Trumpski expanded by giving away tax money and increasing the military budget. Another hypocrite that votes republican but depends on Democrat programs they could not live without. What will you do if Republicans cut these programs, vote for them again because they helped you become poorer? Another "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" ... Except it is clearly not the case when people are working 2 or 3 jobs to survive. The true welfare queens are the big corporations that pay no taxes. You've swallowed their propaganda. Nope. What's clearly better for the economy is a minimum living wage so that people working 40 hours a week get honest compensation for their time and work.Every place that raises the minimum wage see a local economic boost, with more jobs being created and more people staying at their jobs so companies have less expenditure on training new workers.Plus every person that gets a living wage job no longer needs to work multiple jobs to survive, opening up jobs for other workers to take, and unemployment is lowered as a result.PLUS the number of people on food stamps etc is reduced because they no longer need such assistance to compensate for the starvation wages currently being paid.That's how you get people off public assistance, Faith, not by cutting programs.The data is there. Compare blue and red states. Blue states pay net (taxes-assistance) to the Federal Government while red states are net receivers of aid. Because GOP economics is based on false models and no regard for workers health and happiness.Here's a question for you: how fast is a dollar spent if you give it to:

• a bum on the street
• a person working starvation wages
• a person with a living wage
• a person with a 5 figure salary
• a person with a 6 figure salary
• ...
• a billionaire

Hint: it's an inverse relationship running from "within an hour" to "almost never" -- think of their relative need to spend it.Enjoy

And yet the comparison of red and blue states proves just the opposite. For example Kansas under Sam Brownback - Wikipedia was a disaster.Enjoy

They likely already have homes in many countries and "official" residence for tax purposes in a tax free country.That's why we need to revive corporate taxes and taxes on stocks and equities: if you make money in the US you pay US taxes on it. Exactly. They also buy stocks in their companies to raise the stock values (an artificial value that isn't real until stocks are sold). Exactly, whereas higher taxes mean they allocate more to lower their taxable value, and THAT creates jobs or increases payroll. Curiously it seems to me that if the economy depends on some people being unemployed there is something amiss in the system.And IF having people unemployed is of value to the economy then they should be compensated.There are also other considerations: earning money isn't the end-all be-all of life, where does capitalism provide for arts and crafts? The idea that a pursuit is of no value unless it makes money, especially enough to live on, seems stunted, narrow minded, and drab. Not just unemployment but under-employment as well, where jobs worked are insufficient for living and so these workers qualify for assistance. A living wage requirement would eliminate the need for such assistance for most of the people in the system.But I also like Yang's basic income, as it allows artists and musicians, dancers, academicians, scientists, etc to pursue their crafts and in the process brighten the lives of everyone. The return is a more complete population.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : st

Depends on how the banana is oriented .....

Reminds me of the funeral scene in Cat Balloo ...... it’s childishly irreverent and totally disconnected with reality.Sad.Edited by RAZD, : .

``Lower taxable income by putting profit money where it isn’t taxed, either back into company (bonuses for employees etc) or some tax haven. Everybody’s doing something, just some of it is not included in the $$ economy even though it supports it. Stay home parents for example. They aren’t unemployed. Same with artists. The emphasis on earning money imho damages to culture, creativity and wellbeing of people. You just said that 5% unemployment was considered good so that it prevented inflation, or did I misinterpret? Well your joke misses the mark imho.There is more to life than making money, the $$ economy ignores that. And I spent half my earnings at the bakery next to the newspaper building every Saturday (yumm). But if someone spent 40 hours a week at it then yes it should be a living wage ... because they are spending their life to do it. If the employer is buying that time from the employee then they should be fairly compensated, because they can’t do anything else in that time. But it has never been considered a business equivalent occupation. Support has generally relied on the kindness of strangers wealthy patrons, kings, etc.Do you think pure science should be publicly supported or left to the likes of Monsanto for funding?It’s a question of cultural values. Is becoming a money sucking CEO the best we can aspire to?Enjoy