HeloDude

So the Congresswoman wants to end policing...yet she’s more than happy to support policies that has the police take away your AR-15s, by force if necessary. "Daunte Wright was met with aggression & violence. I am done with those who condone government funded murder," she said in a tweet. "No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can’t be reformed." https://news.yahoo.com/rashida-tlaib-calls-no-more-221355507.html

Sounds like a wonderful woman—you’re a lucky man.

Why take time to fill out a survey when the results won’t matter? Does anyone honestly think the GOs/SESs will change their current message/vector based on the responses/results of a survey?

So your original problem was that rich people (supposedly) pay less of a percentage of their income in federal income taxes...and yet you’re against the Fair Tax which literally taxes everyone the exact same amount for what they purchase. But I do agree with the first 5 words of your last paragraph, so there’s that I guess.

So you’re a fan of the Fair Tax plan?

Yep—sure is...though it can be argued that it’s not as good as the traditional pension that is no longer available to new members. Additionally, new members can receive money for retirement without serving 20 years...so given the reasons I listed earlier, even more of a reason to not say to 20 when compared to 1-2 decades ago.

“getting”? It’s been ridiculous for quite a while...it’s just more and more people are finally seeing it. That being said, I’m actually looking forward to seeing how much more ridiculous it can get. And I think we have a ways to go.

If you’re asking if people will start to not seek out a 20+ year military career (ie retirement) because they don’t think it’s worth it...then I think the answer is obvious since we’re already seeing it firsthand. But I think it’s more important to see what military members, who joined since 2018, are going to do since they’re ineligible for the traditional 20 year pension. I also think a reason that many won’t want to stay in for 20 years is that younger generations of professionals change jobs much more often than my generation and older generations. I’m strictly speaking on commissioned officers, but I’m sure parallel arguments can be made for the enlisted side. And while the annual spending of our military is insane, I think it can be argued that the pension system isn’t a large part of that problem wrt the recent spending increases in the last 1-2 decades. When you figure in military spending compared to overall federal government spending since 2007/2008, the military pension becomes even much less of an issue. I think it will be one of the last items on the chopping block, and that the greater problem will just be an increase in overall spending, which will just further devalue your retirement.

They’ll always be able to pay it...it just won’t have the same value as it does today. When you print your own currency, you never run out.

Oh...well, usually when you quote someone and respond to their post, it has something to do with their post. But I guess doing the complete opposite would also make sense.

You said Trump was impeached when responding to Lloyd’s post about Russian collusion, did you not?

You literally were responding to Lloyd’s post regarding Russian collusion...and your response was about Trump not being able to be indicted but that can and was impeached, which you said is like an indictment. And now you’re trying to backtrack and suggest that your post had nothing to do with Russian collusion? Let me guess...you’re drinking more than usual tonight. Everything ok?

And yet, you said this: So who exactly is “stupid”? And didn’t you recently report someone for a “personal attack”? Edited: And I was wrong about the report...that was Homestar. My apologies for the mixup.

Once again...I’m asking: Why wasn’t Trump impeached for “Russian collusion”?

So why wasn’t Trump impeached for “Russian collusion”?

Nah...I think you’ve shown your hypocrisy.

Read what you wrote and then try again...

It just shows the issue is political, that’s all.

Thank you for explaining that you need an ID to adequately determine someone’s identity.

If that’s good enough to prove someone’s identity, then why can’t that also be used when purchasing firearm?

Good thing we’ve never seen that in the US...

Well, to be fair, he said “my lifetime”.

So...religious faith is not personal? I have to subscribe to a certain organized religion to claim a religious exemption? Why are certain religious organizations/their beliefs given more credibility than others? Picking and choosing which religious faiths and organizations are credible and not credible is a dangerous road to go down...

Are you supportive of someone having their own faith and abiding by it, even if they’re the only “member” of that certain faith?

Who says you have to subscribe to a certain church/organized religion to have a certain kind of faith?