Well duh. Zero point devices are for powering the Atlantis.

the drop in crime rate had more to do with the drop in the levels of lead in the everyday environment following its ban in everyday items like gasoline and paint, than with the "get tough" 80s.

Name one state that has banned hte sale of firearms.

or if it involves telling women what to do with their bodies

Ladies and gentlemen, the Anti Union Propogandist.

And btw, wth do you mean you never have to deal with snow in Cali ???

And yet there's only one type of F150, one type of Camry...
Not the California version, and the Oklahoma version, and then the Alska version...

Probably has something to do with the fact that the MFR's just build their cars to the toughest standards, and then sell them in all 50 states.
Oh, and of course, we already do regulate cars nationwide via the NHTSA.

Ya, but tell that to them and get called a revisionist commie liar who hates Merica.
Then you try telling them that they're engaging in projection, and they get a confused look on their face.

LMFTFY

I dont disagree with most of what youre saying. but pikettys main concern wasnt so much corporations as the growth of what we commonly call "old money". money handed down from one generation to the next, growing larger in each generation before being handed to the next. its compounding faster and faster, making the system very top heavy, without any actual labor output involved.

No, it doesnt skyrocket.
Look at the onyl people to be infected in this country: two of the nurses who were in close contact with an infected man after he was sick. None of the people who were on the plane with him.

the chances to be infected are so low because the transmissibilty of Ebola is on the very low end of diseases. First, the person has to be showing symptons. People not showing symptoms are not contagious. Preventing its spread really is as simple as good hygeine, not coughing on people or getting coughed on, isolating patients, santizing equipment and room. The transmissibility of ebola is NOTHING like that of hte cold, the flu, or measles.

Our culture, our sanitary habits, our medical system and our faith in it, are far different from that in Africa. Differences that have contributed to its spread over there. We have top notch medical in this country that we dont fear (death squads masquarading as "medical teams" arent a thing over here), we nearly all of us practice obsessive hygiene and sanitation, we dont keep living in the same 1 room home with a patient who is infected after they become infected, and we dont leave dead infected bodies rotting in the open cause we're afraid to bury it.

If a whopping 2 people getting infected scares you, think on this: last year there were over 60,000 motor vehicle deaths, 40,000 gun deaths, and 36,000 deaths to the flu.
I say it again: Ebola is a non threat, regardless of your ignorance or that of whatever news/panic-machine youve been watching.

And 99 ("the 99%") people buying a car at 20k spend 1,980,000 in the economy.
The rich do NOT pump more into the economy than the middle and lower classes.

The middle and lower classes are what drive the economy. They (we) spend the most in the economy, both relative to income and in total dollars. The majority of economic activity in this country is driven by the consumption and spending of the middle and lower classes. The economy is not driven by rich folks buyibng 50million dollar homes.

To be clear, yes they absolutely do consume more, they consume far more, both relative to income and in total dollars.
you are saying that hte rich spend more in the ecnomy than the middle and lower class and that is patently false.
the rich DO NOT make the economy work, they do not consume more, and they dont spend more as a group in the economy.

your chances of being infected with the flu are >95%
your chances of being infected with the ebola are almost nonexistant.

a plane crash is nearly always fatal for most of hte folks on baord.
but your chances of actually crashing are slim to none.
perspective matters.

The flu is far more dangerous on the whole than ebola. Worldwide wide it kills in the undreds of thousands every year. Ebola isnt even in the quintple digits yet. the biggest difficulties in Africa that contribute to its spread are economic and cultural, rather than the disease itself. Because of the combination of its difficulty in transmission and high mortality rate, Ebola if left to its own devices is far more likely to burn itself out than become a truly threatening epidemic. Ebola in a country like the US is a non threat.

Ebola is not a smart disease. It's too hard to spread and kills too easily. Basic sanitation and seperation is generally all it takes to keep it contained and prevent it from spiraling out of control. the fact it's so deadly actually helps prevent its spread, as it can burn itself out.

In contrast the flu spreads extremely easily and is much hard to stop. And. That actually makes it more dangerous, allowing to infect and kill more people before its done. Every year it kills about 36000 people in the US alone. And that's a normal, minor flu year.

Truly bad flu epidemics, which we thankfully havent seeni n some time, can kill in the millions. The 1918 flu killed between 50 and 100 MILLION people, 675,000 of them in the US. It was the single deadliest event or chain events of the entire 20th Century.

So yes, you're right.
We should stop comparing it to the flu.
The flu is far more dangerous.