Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just wait, she can push it through Emergency Order style. The table's been set. Healthcare emergency coming up first though.
Except one is constitutional and the other is a complete transformation of our country and constitution. A president has a right to defend our borders. No one has the right to turn us into a socialist country.
Except one is constitutional and the other is a complete transformation of our country and constitution. A president has a right to defend our borders. No one has the right to turn us into a socialist country.
So a dictatorship is ok, just as long as you agree with the dictator? Got it.
If the emergency decree is that there's a healthcare emergency because millions of people are dying and in financial ruin due to the practices of a monopoly industry, that sounds very similar in panic level to the border emergency that has been going on for 30 years. Once you let the genie out of the bottle, you don't always like what he does.
The hard core of the Trump constituency clings to its own strain of economic ignorance -- essentially, that the emergence of a global economy is the result of some sort of elitist plot, and that tariffs and other interference with the workings of supply and demand can restore and sustain the conditions of 1945-1970.
Ain't gonna happen; our unprecedented postwar prosperity was a by-product of the fact that the industrial base of all our potential competitors was (1) in ruins, (2) in chains behind the Iron Curtain, or (3) buried under the burden of rebuilding, with many of its younger and brighter sons lost on the battlefield. As that disadvantage diminished, so did the "artificial prosperity".
Th perception, whether real or imagined, of a weakening socialist / New Dealer ethic in the wake of both the final collapse of organized Marxism in 1991 and of Donald Trump's suprising victory a quarter-century later also gives rise to its own distortions. The most appropriate parallel of which I can conceive is the run-up of the stock market in the early and mid-1960s -- The Dow-Jones average peaked at around 1000 in the summer of 1966, but could not surpass that figure until the Grand-Daddy of all Rallies began in August of 1982.
But I can see a number of factors and reasons for optimism -- over the long run. The number of tested (100 years or more of peaceful statecraft) democracies is posed to expand significantly over the next 25 years; hopefully, the fact that such nations don't settle their differences on the field of battle will finally give us the will to reduce the size and expense of a bloated military -- there will still be a need for a global policeman, but the role can be shared. And the societal "safety net" can be expanded for the deserving, provided it's policed to keep those who see indolence as a way of life at bay, preferably by identifying true opportunities for advancement.
To summarize, there are probably going to be "bumps in the road" from time to time, but as they're identified and resolved, I'd be buying.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 03-26-2019 at 08:23 PM..
It wont go away entirely, it will get implemented in bits and pieces as the idiots in the electorate start calling for it. The seed has been planted and have we not seen people here talking it up?
Just like Trump has planted the seeds for Democrats to implement even stricter gun control.
With zero support she is a just a powerless little twit socialist. America is a capitalist republic system of government. Didn't she learn that in school?
Except one is constitutional and the other is a complete transformation of our country and constitution. A president has a right to defend our borders. No one has the right to turn us into a socialist country.
America has been a fully socialist country since 1913.
Which ones have actually come out in support of the Green Deal? If it's more than a handful I would be genuinely surprised. It's not remotely popular with mainline Democrats.
all of these presidential hopefuls have come out in support of the GND.
i would say that at least half the senate democrats that voted present fully support the GND, they just didnt have the courage to step up and say so openly with a yes vote. shummer called it a sham vote, but shummer himself is a sham these days, so he should know.
i would say that at least half the senate democrats that voted present fully support the GND, they just didnt have the courage to step up and say so openly with a yes vote. shummer called it a sham vote, but shummer himself is a sham these days, so he should know.
Yep. Chickens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.