national murder rate highest in 25 years

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I know, look at what happened on 1/6 and they way cops where treated.

So it appears Fox didn't do an article last year when we had one of the largest increases in recent history (at least 30 years).

i don’t know if fox did. but i wouldn’t deny crime was on the rise before then. mostly for reasons that your side refuses to concede need addressing.

rising violent crime, one more headwind your side is facing. because your sides solutions ( fewer cops, fewer crimes being prosecuted, coddling criminals) don’t make sense to anyone to the right of Pete. and a huge swath of america is to the right of Pete.

That was a problem for democrats in VA and NJ. Potentially Looks like it’s going to be a similar problem for them everywhere later this year.

Bill Clinton tried lefty liberalism. He had the brains to see it didn’t work, and he tried ( thanks in part to Newt Gingrich) a different approach, and he helped usher in massive economic growth.

Liberals cannot react rationally to failure anymore. it’s always more of the same. They’re not capable of saying “well that didn’t work, let’s try something else.”


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

trump is a horrible person. but he has some productive accomplishments.

two things can be true at the same
time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can use that logic to justify Genghis Khan or the Mafia also

Just who are the Uber wealthy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

News organizations both locally and nationally have been covering the rise of cargo theft in L.A.’s northeast train tracks in the past few days. Anchors on morning news have been quick to point out that there have been over 100 arrests, and even Forbes have been quick to point out the staggering $5 million worth of merchandise lifted. L.A. TACO first reported on this last November.

Union Pacific, the train company, has gone so far as blasting L.A. District Attorney George Gascon for his policy that has enabled this rampant rise in theft.

However, one major development that may be directly correlated with the rise in theft has continuously been left out: In September of 2020, due to pandemic-related budget cuts, Union Pacific laid off an unspecified number of employees across the railroad system. Including members of its railroad-only police force. Despite record profits in the billions in the last quarter of 2021.

A Union Pacific worker, who asked to remain nameless, came forward to L.A. TACO. In their opinion, the company should “shoulder some of the responsibility instead of just pointing fingers.”

The Union Pacific Police department has jurisdiction over the 32,000 miles of track Union Pacific owns. Many of these “special agents” used to patrol this now infamous stretch of track. According to the source, the number of patrolling officers has been cut from 50 to 60 agents to eight, which the worker thinks has led to an increase in train robberies.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You can use that logic to justify Genghis Khan or the Mafia also

Just who are the Uber wealthy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

true. but only a lunatic like you would think that trump
is in that category of bad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just who are the Uber wealthy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

according to you, anyone who’s ridden Uber.

Ha ha ha, my stomach hurts from
laughing.

you always divert when faced with a. superior argument, you do it multiple times a day Pete.

You complained about the wealthy, yet guy also bragged that they vote democrat.

you tried to have it both ways and got caught, and rather than simply admitting that, you tried getting cute.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

true. but only a lunatic like you would think that trump
is in that category of bad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Silly boy just keep believing, who do you think Donnie learned from?

“Why do you take notes? Lawyers don't take notes." McGahn had a wonderfully snappy comeback, saying that "real lawyers" take notes. Trump responded that he has "had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn," and "he did not take notes."
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

according to you, anyone who’s ridden Uber.

Ha ha ha, my stomach hurts from
laughing.

you always divert when faced with a. superior argument, you do it multiple times a day Pete.

You complained about the wealthy, yet guy also bragged that they vote democrat.

you tried to have it both ways and got caught, and rather than simply admitting that, you tried getting cute.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So who are the Uber wealthy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

So who are the Uber wealthy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you know what it means, but my simpleton argument has reduced you to this. congrats.

it means very very wealthy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you know what it means, but my simpleton argument has reduced you to this. congrats.

it means very very wealthy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well Simpleton, you think that I claimed billionaires are Democrats
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Trend started before Giuliani

He took it to a significantly higher (2X) level. And NY became safer than other big cities compared to which it had previously been more dangerous.

The "trend" was not as significant in the nation, as it was in NY city.

[wdmso]

fewer cops, fewer crimes being prosecuted, coddling criminals)


According to federal data, those worries are unfounded. Last year, as the overall U.S. economy shed 6% of workers, local police departments lost just under 1% of employees after a decade of steady expansion, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics

The nation's incarceration rate peaked at 1,000 inmates per 100,000 adults during the three-year period between 2006 and 2008. It has declined steadily since then and, at the end of 2019, was at the same level as in 1995 (810 inmates per 100,000 adults).Aug 16, 2021
https://www.pewresearch.org › amer...

Another conservative Lie all fear

PS criminals do not act based on a pros and con method of decision making , no matter how hard Republicans want Americans to think that’s how it works.

Feelings over facts the new Republican Party. Or a when faced with a. superior argument.. now we have delusions of grandeur classic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

nowhere near answering the question i asked.

pete, is it a good thing or a bad thing, that ( as you correctly pointed out), the uber wealthy are mostly democrats?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again Jim do you do any research
Or is it all feelings with you

The politics of other billion-dollar families aren’t as well known. Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasa...-or-democrats/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Again Jim do you do any research
Or is it all feelings with you

The politics of other billion-dollar families aren’t as well known. Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasa...-or-democrats/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete, not I, said the wealthy are donating to democrats.

But 50 families is nothing.

Pete was right.

https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2...y-of-the-rich/

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Pete, not I, said the wealthy are donating to democrats.

But 50 families is nothing.

Pete was right.

https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2...y-of-the-rich/

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And here I thought we were talking about the UBER rich ..

I Guess the WSJ has swung liberal

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Pete, not I, said the wealthy are donating to democrats.

But 50 families is nothing.

Pete was right.

https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2...y-of-the-rich/

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Silly regressive, I said the population that voted democratic in the last election is better educated and contributed more to the GDP.

70% of the wealth in the US is owned by the top 1%

Sound sustainable to you?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Silly regressive, I said the population that voted democratic in the last election is better educated and contributed more to the GDP.

70% of the wealth in the US is owned by the top 1%

Sound sustainable to you?

you said that people
who run the economy, or drive gdp, or whatever, vote democrat.

the left is wealthier than. the right. i’m sorry if you don’t like that.

the wealthy getting wealthier isn’t “unsustainable”, except to morons like you who believe wealth is finite, who believes that they get wealthier by taking from us.

it’s not true. they create wealth. that’s why gdp increases.

liberals like to say wealth is finite. it’s stupid and a lie.

it does no one any harm if the wealthy get wealthier. in fact, it helps everyone else, because they pay some taxes, they spend some, they invest some, they give some
to charity. all of which lessens the burden on you,

make that wrong.

what “stress” does it put on anyone else, if oprah winfrey makes another million today? why does that make us less sustainable?

what planet do you live on?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

better educated

these words say a lot about the people that use them to describe themselves and their friends, probably think of themselves as "elites" as well

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

these words say a lot about the people that use them to describe themselves and their friends, probably think of themselves as "elites" as well

that that kid “terrorized”. by being asked a question in the video you posted, he’s highly educated.

no shortage of morons in the lvy league.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you said that people
who run the economy, or drive gdp, or whatever, vote democrat.

the left is wealthier than. the right. i’m sorry if you don’t like that.

the wealthy getting wealthier isn’t “unsustainable”, except to morons like you who believe wealth is finite, who believes that they get wealthier by taking from us.

it’s not true. they create wealth. that’s why gdp increases.

liberals like to say wealth is finite. it’s stupid and a lie.

it does no one any harm if the wealthy get wealthier. in fact, it helps everyone else, because they pay some taxes, they spend some, they invest some, they give some
to charity. all of which lessens the burden on you,

make that wrong.

what “stress” does it put on anyone else, if oprah winfrey makes another million today? why does that make us less sustainable?

what planet do you live on?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The one that looks at history.

If you think that capitalism works best with fewer and fewer people controlling more and more assets you have never understood Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Totalitarianism or basic history. Capitalism is a force for innovation and ingenuity. Not a force for owning competition.

Every innovation in human society that led to economic growth has led to a class that wants to stop having the rules of the game apply to it so as to preserve their wealth, when in fact, there is more wealth for them in the system being healthy and not skewed in their favor.

The point is that unregulated capitalism is inherently bad for society as a whole and yet capitalism when tempered with social justice and govt regulation is a powerful engine that has done more for the human condition than any form of economic system.

The innovation that company’s like microsoft, google and facebook have stymied by buying their competitors can’t be calculated.

Just keep believing what you’re fed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The one that looks at history.

If you think that capitalism works best with fewer and fewer people controlling more and more assets you have never understood Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Totalitarianism or basic history. Capitalism is a force for innovation and ingenuity. Not a force for owning competition.

Every innovation in human society that led to economic growth has led to a class that wants to stop having the rules of the game apply to it so as to preserve their wealth, when in fact, there is more wealth for them in the system being healthy and not skewed in their favor.

The point is that unregulated capitalism is inherently bad for society as a whole and yet capitalism when tempered with social justice and govt regulation is a powerful engine that has done more for the human condition than any form of economic system.

The innovation that company’s like microsoft, google and facebook have stymied by buying their competitors can’t be calculated.

Just keep believing what you’re fed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

we have a constitution that other countries don’t have.

i would t say it’s fair that the wealthy get wealthier, but it’s nonsense to say it’s problematic.

pete, how would you stop it? would
yiu pass a law saying that once your net worth hits some limit, that you’re not allowed to invest anymore?

how would anyone be better off if the wealthy all put their money in their mattresses? how would that help anyone?

who said anything about “unregulated capitalism’? we have tons of regulations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

we have a constitution that other countries don’t have.

who said anything about “unregulated capitalism’? we have tons of regulations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We have broken up monopolies before, the world didn’t end nor the economy collapse and amazingly enough people still accumulated wealth.

After Israel capped bank executive pay at $1 million:
*Share prices still went up
*Exec turnover didn't go up
*Bank performance didn't get worse

It's almost like CEOs don't really need $30 million a year to care about their job

The only one that I know of that didn’t work that way was slavery.

In 1860 when it was legal to own Black people, Mississippi was the 5th wealthiest state. In 1865 it was the poorest. It still is.

Just who writes those regulations you claim control business?
You think the people you elected are doing that?
Or lobbyists paid by business?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We have broken up monopolies before, the world didn’t end nor the economy collapse and amazingly enough people still accumulated wealth.

After Israel capped bank executive pay at $1 million:
*Share prices still went up
*Exec turnover didn't go up
*Bank performance didn't get worse

It's almost like CEOs don't really need $30 million a year to care about their job

The only one that I know of that didn’t work that way was slavery.

In 1860 when it was legal to own Black people, Mississippi was the 5th wealthiest state. In 1865 it was the poorest. It still is.

Just who writes those regulations you claim control business?
You think the people you elected are doing that?
Or lobbyists paid by business?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You used Israel. In a sentence. Conservatives love everything Israeli

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

we have a constitution that other countries don’t have.

Because they are fundamentally authoritarian, Progressives do not want to be constrained, so they have been steadily dismantling the Constitution. Authoritarians like Pete find it useful to pretend their actions are constitutional simply by interpreting them to be so. They have been very successful at erasing a great deal of its restrictions on government power. They need a little more time in occupying the ruling seats of government to finish it off.

i would t say it’s fair that the wealthy get wealthier, but it’s nonsense to say it’s problematic.

pete, how would you stop it? would
yiu pass a law saying that once your net worth hits some limit, that you’re not allowed to invest anymore?

how would anyone be better off if the wealthy all put their money in their mattresses? how would that help anyone?


Excess wealth that is not put to use amounts to nothing. If wealth is property, maintaining it spreads wealth. Buying it spreads wealth. If wealth is goods, buying them spreads wealth. If what is meant by wealth is money, unused money is dead money. Bringing it to life by spending it spreads the wealth.


pete, how would you stop it? would
yiu pass a law saying that once your net worth hits some limit, that you’re not allowed to invest anymore?

Progressive authoritarians would simply confiscate the unneeded wealth from the wealthy, supposedly to redistribute it to those who need it--that is, they would more equitably bring the dead wealth to life. They would euphemize the procedure by calling it taxes. With the assumption that the wealth creators would continue creating wealth that they don't actually need, or is considered unseemly, so that it could be given to the people.

who said anything about “unregulated capitalism’? we have tons of regulations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Progressives believe that the only way society can "progress" is by government force. Regulations are only successful if there are enough of them. A society regulated only to the point in which things like the top 1% own 70% of the wealth is a society that, virtually, is not regulated.

The conundrum is that regulations have been the means given to the few to grow so wealthy. Authoritarians have not figured out a way to stop themselves from partaking in the wealth-fest.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Progressives believe that the only way society can "progress" is by government force. Regulations are only successful if there are enough of them. A society regulated only to the point in which things like the top 1% own 70% of the wealth is a society that, virtually, is not regulated.

The conundrum is that regulations have been the means given to the few to grow so wealthy. Authoritarians have not figured out a way to stop themselves from partaking in the wealth-fest.

I would contend that a supposedly free society where 1% own 70% of the wealth is regulated by that 1% by controlling the forces that elect officials for their own benefit.
But you seem to claim that the rest of the world is stagnant and in all instances without growth, though why anyone would give a #^&#^&#^&#^& about growth if the benefits to them were de minimus is the cause of the “great resignation” in this country.
Notice that this has not occurred throughout the developed world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I would contend that a supposedly free society where 1% own 70% of the wealth is regulated by that 1% by controlling the forces that elect officials for their own benefit.
But you seem to claim that the rest of the world is stagnant and in all instances without growth, though why anyone would give a #^&#^&#^&#^& about growth if the benefits to them were de minimus is the cause of the “great resignation” in this country.
Notice that this has not occurred throughout the developed world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if the 1% took half if what they biden and burned it, they’d no longer own 70% of the total.

Who would be better off, komrade? you?

Why does it matter if bill gates creates more wealth for himself? why do you assume
that the less he has, the more someone else has?

it’s not a zero sum game.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if the 1% took half if what they biden and burned it, they’d no longer own 70% of the total.

Who would be better off, komrade? you?

Why does it matter if bill gates creates more wealth for himself? why do you assume
that the less he has, the more someone else has?

it’s not a zero sum game.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Drunk?

Not for the 1%
The rest continually lose, the bleeding is only a slow drip.
Pretty easy to look at the change in the middle class in the last 50 years

But look at how cheap Walmart crap is, you should be thankful for what you have 🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Drunk?

Not for the 1%
The rest continually lose, the bleeding is only a slow drip.
Pretty easy to look at the change in the middle class in the last 50 years

But look at how cheap Walmart crap is, you should be thankful for what you have 🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

walmart stuff is cheaply made. it’s also cheaply priced, and it’s what the american people
want. sure you never ever go to big box stores, you buy everything from mom and pops.

i don’t especially like walmart. but their prices save their customers,,- lot of money.

the middle class got pulverized because america gave our
manufacturing to china.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

walmart stuff is cheaply made. it’s also cheaply priced, and it’s what the american people
want. sure you never ever go to big box stores, you buy everything from mom and pops.

i don’t especially like walmart. but their prices save their customers,,- lot of money.

the middle class got pulverized because america gave our
manufacturing to china.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just keep believing
Who lobbied for the politicians to do that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just keep believing
Who lobbied for the politicians to do that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

everybody other then american labor unions. it was a disaster.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Who paid the lobbyists who wrote the legislation?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device