TimmyDeanSausage

I have never once heard an elected democratic politician (or serious candidate) speak against the 2nd amendment or even allude to repealing it. The only conversation I have personally seen/heard surrounding “gun control” is all about background checks/red flag laws which are supported by the majority of democratic and republican voters in every poll I’ve seen. All of the so-called “anti2a” rhetoric comes from the right in the form of fear mongering. That is to say (with no intention of being condescending), maybe stop listening to what right wing news outlets and politicians say Democrat’s are saying and just listen to what democrats are actually saying… You might be surprised at how sensible their ideas actually are on this issue.

And how are poor people supposed to afford that joy when we can barely afford to keep ourselves housed/clothed/fed?

Potentially losing your job would be part of the risk/sacrifice a potential candidate would have to accept. Yes, it would be difficult for someone living paycheck to paycheck to do this. Ideally, election reform like this would go hand in hand with economic reform that leads us to a society in which much less people are living paycheck to paycheck. This could happen easily if we start electing real people instead of rich people only.

One option is to publicly fund candidates equally. In such a system someone could apply to run for a position, the position would require a specified amount of people to nominate that person, if that person is nominated they get a grant that covers their campaign costs. The amount wouldn’t be excessive so campaigns would look very different than they do now in places like the US.

Another option is to limit campaign donations from any individual to $100 total. This would force politicians to put effort into building a grassroots campaign while keeping big moneyed interests out of the process.

When politicians get into a position of power, they should be paid enough that they’re firmly in the upper middle class, so they’re comfortable and less likely to accept bribes, and they should not be given any opportunity to accept bribes or profit off of their position in any way.

Did you read their entire comment?

The government income and pension should be enough to live on so that these issues can be avoided.

You present yourself as above emotional displays, then tell a stranger to go fuck themselves over some mildly worded casual internet debate, presumptivly displaying your anger at the inconsequential judgement of your words.

Moreover, you reference “basic laws of supply and demand”, as if reciting words without adding any substance to your argument proves your point and displays your intellect/knowledge. Well, it certainly does one of those things. Probably not in the way you think it does.

The point I’m making is; you are clearly lacking in self-awareness, which is understandable given that you seem to be fresh out of high school (you reference English class, which is something typically only done by kids/young adults). You may want to work on your critical thinking skills and your ability to formulate logically structured arguments if you want to engage in good faith debate while presenting yourself as some sort of expert. Just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.

You’re dissenting in a thread about Christians hating drag. It’s implied you’re talking about drag. Further, blackface is a common dog whisle the alt-right uses to attempt to demonize drag.

I haven’t mocked Christians in a very long time. Some people are mocking Christians, but the intent of the original performance, and the intent of this thread, is very clearly to mock people that USE Christianity as ammunition against people and things they don’t like. Which is (obviously) an exclusionary act… Which the Olympics is against, given that it exists to bring people with differences together… Hence, the performance…

No no, you don’t get it. They don’t like drag, and we should’ve known christian’s don’t like drag and wouldn’t want to go to a drag show. So by us doing them anyways, knowing they won’t be there, we’re excluding them by not excluding them while they exclude themselves. We’re the assholes y’all.

Since you bring up logic, the logical fallacy you’re displaying is called the false equivalence fallacy. Blackface is outrageous because the purpose is to demonize and humiliate black people. The purpose of drag is to CELEBRATE freedom of feminine expression, regardless of sex/gender. One is inherently exclusive, while the other is inherently inclusive.

It seemed like you were referring to overall voting trends. I was referring specifically to the vote suppression of city dwellers due to the extreme gerrymandering that has historically happened in Texas. Glad we agree though.

That’s just the loose buttholes of all the alt right cum dumbsters singing their saviors personal anthem

The people of Houston are. The people of the surrounding rural areas, who have actual voting power, are not.

Their formatting was dog dukey, but I was still able to parse what they were saying fairly easily. They’re saying “good job judge Jackson. Too bad you won’t be able to get a free house from insert evil billionaire here (/s)”. While I agree with your sentiment, the way you go about pointing these things out can backfire, if done with a rude tone, such as the way you chose to do it. There you go; an unsolicited constructive criticism for an unsolicited constructive criticism. :)

Gross. You really shouldn’t eat garbage…

Both of y’all are talking a lot about evidence without posting any sources. I don’t have a side in this debate, but I would like to see some of this evidence you guys keep referencing, just to further my own understanding of these historical events.

Edit: grammar.

Well, it’s very meaningful to continue to support your emotional support corporations. They need us as much as we need them. That’s why you need to buy the product, and the “continued use” package. They’re not charging extra for standard things just to charge extra. It’s about the continued closeness in your relationship with daddy Tesla.

I don’t get how you don’t get it. I mean that with no animosity of any kind. I’m genuinely curious when people talk about buying a house like it’s a common sense option.

As a millennial in my early 30’s, the only people I know my age that own a house are people with parents that essentially handed them a fully built life when they came of age. As in, paid for college, bought their first (or first few) cars, floated them after college, paid for their weddings, then paid half or the full deposit on their “starter” home. And that’s not a specific person I have in mind. That’s every friend I have who owns a house. Their parents had that kind of money. Every other person I know that doesn’t have rich parents (I’m in this camp) is working themselves to the bone just to scrape by. After 16 years in the workforce, 14 of those years being in a highly niche (but terribly paid) tech role, I can barely afford to keep a car running doing all of the work myself, let alone scrape together an extra $200 to get a secured card so I can finally start building credit. My pay checks are already consumed by the time they hit my account, and there’s a seemingly endless backlog of debt from decades of poverty. My parents are finally at a point were they can help their kids at times, but it’s in small amounts and they can only help one or two of us at a time. But, they’re boomers who might never retire, so even taking small loans from them feels bad. It’s an incredibly disparaging state of existence. I’m leaving out a lot of details for the sake of not writing a novel, but, I’m not financially illiterate, and I’m not giving up. I’ve just accepted the bleakness of my reality while I slowly grind myself (hopefully) out of it over the next 2 to 3 decades.

I’m not trying to whine, or point out your privilege. What I’m saying is; this is my reality. One in which the concept of “extra money” you can put aside for smart investments is a nice delusion to entertain. The fact that people like you are out there wondering why someone our age wouldn’t buy a house boggles my mind, but also shows a very stark contrast in the lives of working/povery-class people and middle class and up. That is a huge problem.

But that’s just my perspective. As I said, I’m genuinely curious to hear yours. How are you in a position where buying a house is the obvious option when statistics show that is very much not the case for most people under 40?

Edit: spelling.

Ok, I’ve voted in every federal, state, and local election since I turned 18, but my state is heavily jerrymandered. What now?

My SO and I live in a 4 bedroom house with 4 other adults in their 30’s. I haven’t had this many roommates since I was 17, but I’m finally making some progress on my ridiculous medical debt. Best country in the world.

Nope! I have hypertension, so I’m extremely sodium conscious, out of necessity. The king Oscar tins we buy have 350mg of sodium in them, which is around 15% DV. That’s not much compared to pretty much all red meats…