Total posts: 542
Posted in:
-->
@ponikshiy
Woman should get him life insurance before he disappears not look to mother country. Maybe kid has bad genetics if mom not smart enough to k own this
Life insurance would not be an effective financial tool in these instances.
Created:
Posted in:
People!!!!!
I asked a question about "unwed mothers". There are "gaps" in what is revealed to the public. Many of you have turned this into an adolescent style case of verbal diarrhea.
Do your parents know you are online? Do you think DebateArt is just another FACEBOOK?
Kindly stay on course. If you have no information, remain silent.
Created:
Posted in:
In at least one State, when an unwed mother seeks government assistance, she is required to name the father. The man can then either admit to being the father, or submit to a DNA test to prove or disprove paternity. The proven father is then responsible to the county for child support etc. In some cases the woman rattles off a list of potential suspects. My question is "What happens if no father is proven? Does she still get assistance? ", and "Who pays?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
LBJ comes in somewhere in the 5th to 9th position, depending on which study is cited. I would be willing to debate YOU on this matter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I would posit Wilson as #2 and Truman as #3.
Created:
Posted in:
If an unwed mother seeks assistance from the county ( or other governmental agency ) and a father cannot be found, who pays?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Could a woman just start picking names out of a telephone book, or a high school yearbook?
Created:
Posted in:
In at least one State, when an unwed mother seeks government assistance, she is required to name the father. The man can then either admit to being the father, or submit to a DNA test to prove or disprove paternity. The proven father is then responsible to the county for child support etc. In some cases the woman rattles off a list of potential suspects. My question is "What happens if no father is proven? Does she still get assistance? ", and "Who pays?"
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
- apathetic as in they aren't concerned that milk is cheaper than soda ( which only a fool would believe otherwise ), they will buy what they want because it's just monopoly money anyway.
- careless as in they don't care that milk is cheaper than soda ( which only a fool would believe otherwise ), they will buy what they want because it's just monopoly money anyway.
- etc etc etc
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
First off, keep a level of decorum or if you cannot then go away.
You have conceded that milk is 3.4 cents per ounce, and that it is more nutritious than soda. In my area milk is 2.3 cents per ounce.
A 2L pop is $2.40 according to the St Louis Fed https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU0000FN1101.
Therefore soda is at least 3.5 cents per ounce. Note that this figure includes ALL 2L soda such as store brands, generics, and other "off brands". A name brand such as Coke is going for $2.99 to $5.00. ( or 4.4 to 7.3 cents per ounce )
Anyway you view it, milk beats soda for food value.
Shopping education is needed perhaps
when many shoppers are using SNAPs.
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You need to re-read my post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Do not negotiate on the debt ceiling Joe!The official policy is we don't negotiate with terrorists, even when they are holding the government as a hostage.
I hope your comment is an expression of your humor and not an expression of your ignorance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Hey man. Thanx for helping me get to 25 forum comments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
My use of Medicare is very minimalReally? Define minimal. Once a month? Once a year?
Twice per year.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
FYI. Cut and paste my quote.Then select quotes from the line menu above. That’s how you highlight the other guy’s post.
That might work in Windows. I use LINUX. I found a workaround.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Actually it is a zero sum game. If all federal spending that is included in the GDP calculation were to disappear, the other inputs would quickly rise to total 100% of GDP.Oh really? Says who? And how would we fund the military?
Your comment has three parts
#1 Oh really......YES
#2 who says .....MATH, ECONOMICS, LOGIC, BUSINESS ADMIN.......
#3 how to fund the DOD ........Illogical. The discussion is not about what the feds spend money on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Even a thief makes money from a fence.Who’s the fence in that scenario?
A better question is "who is the thief"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You have a private pension? Please explain. You had a job for 40 years that required you to pay into Social Security but your benefits will come from a private company?
When I entered government service, I opted out of social security in favor of a private pension that I selected from an approved list.
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
So you find milk to cost 3.4 cents per ounce.
Soda averages 4.7 cents per ounce . or 72% more.https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU0200FN1102
Milk is much more dense nutritionally, and therefore a better choice.
Ask yourself this.....if milk is both cheaper and more nutritious, why do SNAP buyers purchase more soda than do non SNAP buyers?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I said "Many economists believe that consumer spending has a much greater impact on GDP."
You said "Yes, consumer spending is 70% of GDP in this country. That’s why raising the minimum wage is good for GDP. The poor will spend the increase."
Actually it is a zero sum game. If all federal spending that is included in the GDP calculation were to disappear, the other inputs would quickly rise to total 100% of GDP.
( and that is the type of logic I see coming out of DC).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You stated "Yes, consumer spending is 70% of GDP in this country. That’s why raising the minimum wage is good for GDP. The poor will spend the increase."
And the "ten dollar taco"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You asked "Did the government earn interest on loans it made to corporations like AIG after the financial crash of 2008?"
Even a thief makes money from a fence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You said..."I’m guessing you would die early and hungry without Social Security and Medicare. Right?"
WRONG
Even though I paid into Social Security for years, I opted for a private pension that is far superior. No hunger here. My use of Medicare is very minimal . So you are wrong yet again.
Is there ANYTHiNG that the Democrats tell you that you do not believe?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You said" In my house I just earn more money"
Bad analogy....the government "EARNS" nothing.
You said, without evidence" that's not true.
Ford Motor Company earns money. GM earns money. Apple earns money.
Motorola earns money when a consumer purchases the Motorola product. If the consumer doesn't want it, they don't have to but it.
The government "earns money " the same a thief does. They take it from a victim without consent.
The government "earns" so little as to be essentially nothing.
Debate me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Wrong again saying "Limit federal spending - this will certainly decrease GDP growth. Government spending is a component of GDP."
Federal spending today is about 25% of GDP.
Federal outlays reached 40% of GDP in WW2 during a bonafide National emergency, and 31% during the COVID emergency.
The 25% is very high historically absent an emergency.
Many economists believe that consumer spending has a much greater impact on GDP. Thus as the government takes money away from consumers, the GDP drops.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You said" In my house I just earn more money"
Bad analogy....the government "EARNS" nothing.
Debate me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I said "The Republican plan does much to improve the nation's economic health. "
You said "That’s not true. The Republican plan is designed to defund Biden’s initiatives and hopefully create a recession to improve Republicans chances in 2024."
You are taking a very narrow view of reality.
The plan will: Limit federal spending to 2022 levels, Claw back COVID money, Reduce the IRS, Block student loan relief, Put the USA on a course for energy self reliance" ( per PBS ).
Another factor is that while the Republicans have passed a bill, the Democrats have put forth ZERO alternates. In fact after Schumer blasted the bill " he entered that same bill onto the Senate calendar under a special rule that allows it to bypass the Senate committee process and move right to the floor for consideration."
"You need to recognize bovine excrement so you don't find yourself swallowing it lock stock and barrel" - source unknown.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I said " The debt limit is a symptom of out of control government spending "
You said "Wrong. It’s the result of decades of cutting taxes for wealthy individuals and corporations "
Economics 101 .....If you need to borrow more money, you need to reduce your expenses first.
Also here are some facts
"The Most Tax-Cutting US Presidents
John F. Kennedy, 1961-63
If today’s rich people complain that the wealthy shoulder too great a share of the tax burden, they should be happy that the highest rate in the top tax bracket is capped at 37%. According to The Atlantic, the top tax rate was often double that or more for over a decade after World War II — and all that revenue from the rich is what fueled the post-war boom.
President Eisenhower fought his own party to keep the highest tax rate at an astounding 90%, but President Kennedy finally lowered it to 70% upon taking office."
( from Gobankingrates.com )
And the US debt is now 123.4% of GDP as of Dec. 2022
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You are casting this as an 'us vs them" issue. The debt limit is a symptom of out of control government spending .Read again .."The Biden administration has known about this shortfall since January and did nothing to slow expenditures, or find ways to pay down the debt. The Republican plan does much to improve the nation's economic health. "
Also "Here are the facts.
CLAIM: Trump “ran up more debt than any other President in American history.”
AP’S ASSESSMENT: That’s incorrect. The debt incurred during the Trump era was very high. But in terms of raw dollars, the total debt rose more under former President Barack Obama, with Trump in second place — though Obama held office for two terms, while Trump served one." ( per AP News )
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I refer you back to the opening line in my last comment. To wit; " “In the United States v. Virginia…the Majority Justice Ginsburg stated, ‘supposed inherent differences are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications, physical differences between men and women, however, are enduring. The two sexes are not fungible. A community made up exclusively of one. Sex is different from a community composed of both.’ Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?...”
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Do you have a newer study? Also milk costs about 2 cents per ounce. Soda is twice that.
Created:
According to the USDA...."According to a 2016 report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, sweetened beverages, including soda, are among the most commonly purchased items by recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — or SNAP.
SNAP households spend about 10 percent of food dollars on sugary drinks, which is about three times more than the amount they spend on milk. In New York City alone, as we've reported, this translates into more than $75 million in sugary drink purchases each year that are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers." (
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/10/29/659634119/food-stamps-for-soda-time-to-end-billion-dollar-subsidy-for-sugary-drinks).Maybe "lazy" isn't the right term.
Created:
Posted in:
One need only turn to a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to get the "correct" stance on this issue. In 2022 Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was being questioned concerning her nomination to the Supreme Court. Here is a q and a between Senator Blackburn and Jackson:
Blackburn: “In the United States v. Virginia…the Majority Justice Ginsburg stated, ‘supposed inherent differences are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications, physical differences between men and women, however, are enduring. The two sexes are not fungible. A community made up exclusively of one. Sex is different from a community composed of both.’ Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?...”
Blackburn: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”
Jackson: “Can I provide a definition?”
Blackburn: “Mhmm, yeah.”
Jackson: “No, I can’t.”
Blackburn: “You can’t?”
Jackson: “Not in this context--I’m not a biologist.”
Blackburn: “The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can't give me a definition?”
Jackson: “Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law and I decide. So I’m not…”
Blackburn: “The fact that you can't give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about. Just last week, an entire generation of young girls watched as our taxpayer funded institutions permitted a biological man to compete and be a biological woman in the NCAA swimming championships. What message do you think this sends to girls who aspire to compete and win in sports at the highest levels?”
Blackburn: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”
Jackson: “Can I provide a definition?”
Blackburn: “Mhmm, yeah.”
Jackson: “No, I can’t.”
Blackburn: “You can’t?”
Jackson: “Not in this context--I’m not a biologist.”
Blackburn: “The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can't give me a definition?”
Jackson: “Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law and I decide. So I’m not…”
Blackburn: “The fact that you can't give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about. Just last week, an entire generation of young girls watched as our taxpayer funded institutions permitted a biological man to compete and be a biological woman in the NCAA swimming championships. What message do you think this sends to girls who aspire to compete and win in sports at the highest levels?”
Created:
Posted in:
Negotiate Joe! That is how it works. The Biden administration has known about this shortfall since January and did nothing to slow expenditures, or find ways to pay down the debt. The Republican plan does much to improve the nation's economic health.
"Last week, House Republicans came together to pass responsible legislation to raise the debt ceiling and rein in Washington’s out of control spending. By passing the Limit, Save, Grow Act, the House proposed the only current plan to address the debt limit and our nation’s fiscal future." (https://huizenga.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=401617).
The bill has little to no effect on "ordinary Americans" (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/chairman-smith-limit-save-grow-act-follows-precedent-of-pairing-spending-reforms-with-debt-limit-to-address-americas-fiscal-crisis/).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Facts over feeling. Data over agenda. "Trump added $6.7 trillion to the debt between fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2020, a 33.1% increase, largely due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and 2020 recession. ( https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Blaming Republicans may be in vogue , but facts say there is plenty of blame to go around. Time says "Since the 1950s, both political parties have engaged in legislative battles over the debt ceiling—each using it to paint the other as financially irresponsible" ( https://time.com/6281003/debt-ceiling-history/ ).
Then you call the Republican stand "terrorism". Both the Department of Homeland Security and Civics 101 would disagree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Your assertions are incorrect.
You assert "Republicans are the people who said Obama shouldn’t place a Supreme Court Justice in an election year, then they placed one 2 weeks before an election." Congress took Obama's nomination and killed it in accord with Senate rules. "[Back] in 1992, when Obama's vice president, Joe Biden, was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee [he] mused about urging President George H.W. Bush to withhold any nominees to the high court until the end of the "political season."
( 1). The "Biden rule" as it became known asserted that between mid term elections and Presidential elections, when the Senate was of a party different from the President, the nominee would not be affirmed. So Merrick Garland 's nomination was tabled in 2016 per the rule and Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed on October 26, 2020 per the rule.
Further your hatred of a particular political party seems to outweigh your reasoning. The debt ceiling was already raised in 2021 (2). The government hit that limit on January 19, 2023. (3) The only body with authority to initiate legislation to raise the limit is the House (4)
In April the House passed a bill to raise the limit. Biden refused to negotiate on the bill. It has been read twice in the Senate, with no action taken.
While one can cast this as a political football, that is very short sighted. More is a stake here than the media has spoon fed to people who think like Iwantrooseveltagain.
2 ....Public Law 117-73.
4 ...Constitution of the USA Article 1 section 7.
5
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
"Universal basic income experiment made people happier but not more likely to get a job"
"Finland's Social Insurance Institution (FSII) has published the results of an income experiment it carried out for two years to learn more about ways to reduce unemployment. They report that their experiment showed that giving unemployed people a no-strings-attached guaranteed income instead of an unemployment allowance made them happier and less stressed—but it did not make them any more or less likely to get a job."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
I stated "Some UBI "experiments" seemed to make people happier" and you asked "Which ones?".
Finland.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
@Kaitlyn
It does appear that some nations that tried UBI found some level of success. There did appear to be limitations. If UBI makes "poor people work less", then the UBI might be too high. Some UBI "experiments" seemed to make people happier, Many plans have strict requirements such as abiding by the law as a condition to receive UBI. Probably UBI would have to be highly tailored to cultural mind sets.
Created: