OldWoodFrame @ OldWoodFrame @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

1,566

Joined

2 yr. ago

Finally we can put these homeless people under a solid roof with their own bed where the government will pay for all their meals and ensure they have time for recreation and socializing.

As long as it's prison.

She was polling worse than him until the debate so that kind of makes sense.

I don't get why people are getting so incensed with this answer. It's an election, it's not fully in his control. If he thinks he's the best candidate to beat Trump, and he runs his campaign the best way possible, and he still loses, then that is democracy and the will of the people has spoken and there was nothing he could have done.

It IS about saving democracy, and bodily autonomy, and the Supreme Court appointments, and he isn't saying that it isn't. He's just saying all he can do is run the best campaign he can, and if the people still vote Trump then he accepts that decision.

You can quibble with his assumptions here, he might not be the best candidate to beat Trump anymore, but that's the right answer.

https://i.redd.it/7slc1qkpa7l91.jpg

Really? Must be service specific. Didn't work on lemm.ee on the Connect app, not sure which is the reason.

Do>!n!<'t for>!get you're!< her>!e forever!<

(alright that didn't work)

We do have a problem with executive power creep so like there's a world where I'm on board for non-delegation but there just is a reality that some questions are too small, detailed, and nuanced to expect a new bill out of Congress each time.

So like setting new tariffs, should be a congressional action and it was improperly delegated. Determining whether a new ladder is safe for workers, can be delegated.

"Person who assaulted, charged with assault"

Why is this news?

Median earnings grew faster than inflation every quarter between Q2 2022 and Q4 2023, a year and a half straight. Ticked down in Q1 2024 but basically back to pre pandemic levels.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q

They remanded to the lower courts to determine that. But like it does have some implication. They definitely did not say everything the president does is an official action.

Didn't they just legalize "any" official action?

People aren't reading the article. They did not rule that he is immune because his acts were official.

They ruled that official acts, and not unofficial acts, convey immunity, and remanded to lower courts to determine whether his acts should be considered official or unofficial.

It was always short sighted tax policy. We're just living with the blowback.

But in 1954, apparently intending to stimulate capital investment in manufacturing in order to counter a mild recession, Congress replaced the straight-line approach with "accelerated depreciation," which enabled owners to take huge deductions in the early years of a project’s life. This, Hanchett says, "transformed real-estate development into a lucrative ‘tax shelter.’ An investor making a profit from rental of a new building usually avoided all taxes on that income, since the ‘loss’ from depreciation canceled it out. And when the depreciation exceeded profits from the building itself—as it virtually always did in early years—the investor could use the excess ‘loss’ to cut other income taxes." With realestate values going up during the 1950s and ’60s, savvy investors "could build a structure, claim ‘losses’ for several years while enjoying tax-free income, then sell the project for more than they had originally invested."

Since the "accelerated depreciation" rule did not apply to renovation of existing buildings, investors "now looked away from established downtowns, where vacant land was scarce and new construction difficult," Hanchett says. "Instead, they rushed to put their money into projects at the suburban fringe—especially into shopping centers.

http://archive.wilsonquarterly.com/in-essence/why-america-got-malled

But Slightly More Rotting Corpse has the better environmental policy which we'll need before the last remnant of Florida is fully swallowed by the sea in the next 4 years.

He has a large majority of delegates. There is no way to force him out of the candidacy, he already won it.

So he would have been wrong if the Comey announcement didn't come out and turn people off from voting for Hillary. Bad process, right result.

I actually think you had a flawed process if you were projecting a Trump win in 2016, getting that "right" doesn't impress me. Comey re-announcing new emails was 11 days before the election, there wasn't time to see what people thought of it.

Edit: The downvoters don't remember the election. Clinton was winning basically every poll, her numbers peaked after the Access Hollywood tape and dropped from that peak, she was still winning polls by 4 points on election day. There are vagueries of voting behavior based on weather in different locations and the vote was super close in the swing states. Even with perfect state by state information adjusted by poll error, it was less than 50/50 Trump would win. It was a bad prediction.

It happened to happen, because things with 40% odds happen 40% of the time, but predicting the 40% outcome is bad process.

Fascism is not defined by selling arms to a country that committed a genocide. Trump did that too, but that's not the definition.

The "spandrel hypothesis" is the front runner explanation. Essentially we didn't evolve to have chins but rather evolved other things that are helpful, and the chin is a byproduct of that other evolution. Not harmful so it didn't get selected away, but not helpful.

So, obviously, people don't generally change their legal gender for an advantage somewhere. But if they do, that's a pretty good sign, not that it's too easy to change your gender, but that there's a gender bias in the law.

So arguably, the easier it is to change your legal gender, the less of a problem gender-based affirmative action is. Conservatives must love this! End liberal overreach in one easy step!