![](https://communick.news/pictrs/image/3f4d7ed7-06de-4570-8de2-e748d1a62517.webp)
![](https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/fe703e2f-0e2d-4cdf-9012-c55f9be8fb4b.png)
They won’t see it. Their “news” sources won’t cover it.
They won’t see it. Their “news” sources won’t cover it.
Is it?
Are you saying you would support bad people under the right circumstances?
It’s your idea.
All I did is assume all good people agree with you.
Why is Epstein’s still up?
Do they know something?
Do you think they’d stop being bad people if they couldn’t make an honest living? Would it be better or worse if they were on the street? Do you think they might resort to criminality also?
Do you feel better knowing they aren’t getting your money? Even at the cost of them ever doing anything good for anyone?
Is it harm reduction if all the bad people couldn’t make an honest living? Would it be better or worse if they were living on the street? Do you think they might resort to criminality also?
I’m sure a few bad people make a living maintaining it, and all the roads you depend on everyday.
Bad people are everywhere, doing all sorts of jobs you appreciate.
It sounds like you’re arguing that bad people shouldn’t be paid to anything good.
That makes sense if you believe Biden is the only one who can beat Trump.
The all the polls say he won’t.
But even if Biden is the chosen one and beats Trump, he can’t run in 2028 while Trump surely will. What then? Biden was our only hope, and he’s not an option anymore.
No. This idea of Biden or bust is wrong. I’m sure lots of people could beat Trump. They’d just do it by embracing progressive populism against conservative populism. But the Democratic elite are very much against that.
That’s because, Progressive populism is very much against the ownership class, which both parties depend on. Conservative populism on the other hand, is largely a tool of the ownership class.
65million was the number I learned as a kid born in 1980.
Sometimes terrible people can do good things.
Those good things should be supported.
Judge a project on it own merits.
People still use the Autobahn.
I live in Albuquerque NM. I remember when we tried to buy a bunch of BYDs electric busses a few years ago.
They were nothing but problems apparently. Batteries were to small, couldn’t run a full day. Breaks weren’t good enough to stop in a reasonable distance. Oh and the doors would open spontaneously, while driving, with out being able to be closed.
The city canceled the rest of the order, and never put them into service.
Both can be true.
In fact the former could even be caused by the latter.
Small quantities of BVO are used legally in some citrus-flavored drinks in the United States to keep the flavor evenly distributed.
No, you’ll just have to shake it before drinking.
Number 1 has issues.
Yes wage growth in 2023 was higher than inflation by a margin of 1.3%. That fails to take into account the 7% and 6.5% inflation of '21 and '22. So people are still way behind in recent years.
Also, while by income rates, “Gen Z are now wealthier than any previous generation.” That doesn’t include the drastic increase in housing costs. So while they do have more money, more still have to live with their parents, and delay starting their own separate life, than previous generations. Even that extra money isn’t enough.
Ah! I didn’t realize that. Then it might derail that conviction.
Thought it would still be a big lift to determine it was an official act as POTUS.
Yes I know that’s what they’re talking about. And this SCOTUS ruling doesn’t effect that case at all.
This case was brought to SCOTUS by Trumps Jan6 lawers. It only matters to things done while in office.
The bribery case, the falsified documents case, aren’t at all effected by this ruling.
No, that’s not at all what they did.
All those things happened before he was president. None of it would count.
This ruling is about his January 6th trial, and the Georgia election interference trial.
That is me. Numerous people have called me “The most literal person I know”.
I wrote only exactly what I meant.
I would TALK to her about looking for someplace to live she does feel safe.
And literally… Advocating Talking about something, is not advocating Doing that thing.
I’m fully aware, and disagree.
Someone else called it a Slippery Slope. That’s closer, but still not quite right.
It’s actually Reductio ad Absurdum.
Which is a useful thought exorcise when analyzing many ideas.