Tax cuts are tax relief. When you get a refund it is not a hand out from the government, it is YOUR money being returned because you paid too much. The government runs on your money. It takes from you for the 'common good'... and some of that common good is waste (pork).
You might have a valid point, but without any actual numbers, you're just parroting ideology.
It's entirely possible that 60% of spending is pork, but the 40% that goes to the common good is so valuable that it is worth wasting 60 cents on the dollar.
To actually have a point, you need to show that the common good generated from your tax dollars is not worth the extra pork that goes along with it.
TLDR: I don't take it as a given that your ideological preconceptions are correct.
Threats have to be followed through. One of the reasons why I don't use threats. Mostly because a threat always also includes the option to avoid it if the other party changes its behaviour.
By the time I ponder what to do to someone, he already did enough to have forfeited the chance for a choice.
The alternative proposal would be that schools be held responsible for bullying. Simple as that. Only if looking away gets more costly and inconvenient than interfering a school will do it.
Right now, the best thing a school can do, from the school's point of view, is letting the bullies rule the school yard. It only has advantages for the school. Bullies are usually potential troublemakers. They are the kind of people who would get into trouble if the chance presents itself. Allowing bullies to beat up weaker kids gives the bullies and outlet for their aggression so they won't take it out on, say, school property or other property around school that might reflect badly on the school, and bullies honor that "silent agreement". After all, they get what they want, they get to beat up someone with impunity, so they don't have too much of a problem to play along the "rules".
That is a very favorable situation for the school because they don't have to deal with the bully problem. It does create a lot of really messed up kids, some of whom will spend a lot of time and money during their adult years in therapy to get over the trauma. Or it might end in a sad report about yet another kid who couldn't take it anymore taking a gun and revenge instead.
I'd rather have my kids use "excessive force" than endure bullying. I can help them with the former. It's way harder with the latter.
The others are usually dictated by citizens or external factors in unexpected ways during a fiscal year. War, 9/11. natural disaster, etc...
I guess "natural disaster" is one way to describe the Bush tax cuts.
The controversy over our budget deficits are an entirely manufactured one,
made all the more hypocritical because the biggest critics are also the most responsible for it.
Actually, "becoming the karate kid" can be just as bad if not worse. Because then HE is the bad guy. Everything was fine while the bully beat him up, the bully was happy and he was the punching bag, now suddenly there is a bully that was beaten up with parents that cause a shitstorm. And all because that punching bag had to fight back.
That simply isn't done, ya know? You disturbed the peace of your school!
Pot, meet kettle...
They lie, lie and lie some more.
Are you implying they made the wrong career choice and should have gone for statistician jobs instead?
Yeah, but wouldn't it be kinda hard to find someone who kills himself in the end for money?
Use the Somalian Shilling as reference and it gets even ten times easier to become a millionaire.
Btw, is it me or is it funny that the Somalian Shilling is abbreviated SOS?
Turning the other cheek doesn't work. I can vouch for that. I tried. Trust me, it never works.
What works is ensuring that the other side cannot continue the fight. That does work.
Maybe the point of the whole discussion went by you, so allow me to direct you to the problem at hand. The question is not whether your kid is safer at school or outside. The question is why teenagers choose their schools for seemingly "random" shooting sprees. Why do they go for their school? If their goal, as the media claim it to be, was to run amok, cause damage and kill aimlessly, a school is by no means a "good" target.
These kids are not on a random killing spree. They are taking revenge for what has been done to them.
That's the point. Not whether your kids are safer inside school or outside.
For whatever reason, WSJ seems to give Google a pass when it comes to the paywall