Actually, I think it would be best to just get rid of the Senate completely.
It's totally non-functional due to arcane rules and inherently undemocratic since states like Rhode Island and Wyoming (population less than 1 million) get the same number of senators as large states like New York and California.
A parliamentary system would make for a much more functional government.
Actually, I think it would be best to just get rid of the Senate completely.
The banks want to see the supply of housing reduced so that the value of property will start increasing again.
I don't know that actually makes sense. The banks own (outright, through foreclosure) less than 8% of the housing in any given state and less than 2% in most states. In a few states, they might be able to influence it that much. But the problem is that a percentage of the homes they own will be damaged to the point that they are complete write-offs which are actually worth less than a vacant lot due to the cost of demolition...
The elephant in the room is the NSA and the people are behind it.
The elephant in the room is mercantilism. Corporations discovered that under capitalism they could buy the government and turn it into their personal playground. The NSA is just one predictable arm of a corporate government.
They stole the buses?
You don't actually have to steal the vehicle. Armed assault on a vehicle is carjacking. If the window was broken out, it was probably broken out with a weapon. If used in an attack, a stick or rock can become a "deadly weapon". Courts tend to side with the driver, and courts tend to side against homeless and unemployed people. It would probably be pretty easy to show carjacking here with some video evidence of people beating on the bus with stuff.
You sir, need to lay off the psychotropic drugs and get with reality.
You, sir, need to lay off the ego and get with statistics. Unless you have some, you're just wasting airtime.
"Totalitarian" governments control their populations physically, with chains, clubs, physical restriction. "Democracies" control their populations mentally, with imagery, thoughts, mental restriction.
They're both the same process - one implemented in hardware, the other in software.
Not only are you wrong (both types of government routinely use both types of control) but the American government uses lots of both types of control. Look at how much of our population is in prison or take a look at the reaction to a WTO protest sometime if there is any doubt.
I pledge allegience,
to the flag
I leave symbols to the symbol-minded. --Carlin
and to the republic
for which it stands:
Yes, republic. Not democracy. Sorry, but my level of support for the republicans running this nation has run thin.
The "under God" bit is a violation of the first amendment, and was added retroactively to deliberately violate it. Our fucking pledge is unconstitutional. We're pledging to violate the constitution.
Bullshit. In fact, this nation was divided away from the British, and it can be divided again if necessary.
with liberty and justice for all.
That's the biggest lie of all. It's liberty for the rich and justice for no-one.
So yes, I very much object to the pledge.
I objected to it in elementary school, and had to stand facing the wall for refusing to say it because of the God content. My mother was raised catholic, but became an atheist. I went to a baptist day care because it was cheap, and they told me lots of cute little stories on a felt board which taught me about how ridiculous Christianity was. To me the stories were no more credible than the [mainstream, typically Disney] cartoons they'd show us in between on rainy days.
I object strenuously to a bullshit, jingoistic, illegal, borderline traitorous pledge.
Funny thing is that economy should be the least of the concerns. Trust, freedom, peace, and probably lives should be the (maybe not so obvious?) consequences.
When you live in a capitalist society, the economy is never the least of the concerns. Nor, in fact, can you afford for it to be. This in itself wouldn't be a bad thing if the distribution of wealth were not biased towards assholes.
Ouch, that's a lot of EDM time. I presume the wheels were built to do some deformation, anyway.
I'm trying to find a reference for "tiviozing". Can you explain?
I was following the conversation up to then.
I plugged 'tivoizing' into wikipedia and the top result was Tivoization. Now you, too, know how to use the internets. HTH, HAND.
Hyperbole much? Unlike kidnapping, making somebody late for work is not a federal crime.
No, but in California, attacking people in a vehicle is often considered to be a carjacking, which is a felony.
There's a difference between "the middle class leaves" (because middle-class jobs are gutted) and "the middle class is forced out of their homes by the upper-middle-class."
There's only so much San Francisco to go around. Why should the people who got there first have a right to it? We pretty much destroyed that precedent when we founded this nation on top of the natives' ground. In fact, if we follow American historical precedent, those people should not only be forced out of their homes, but also murdered, raped, etc.
Perhaps you don't believe anyone should be allowed to settle down and work and live in a small but reasonably comfortable home if they can't pull a six-figure salary
The issue is whether they should be able to live anywhere they want. The truth is that if the value of your home increases to the point that you can't afford to pay the property taxes, you can afford to sell your home and move someplace else. People are always complaining about civilization arriving where they live. Here's a nice example. There's some folks on our road who have been here apparently since before it was paved. One day I evaporated one of their chickens with the Astro because they couldn't keep them under control and they were out on the road. One of them decided to dart under the van as I was passing by it and the rest (and the chicken) is history involving a gigantic expanding spherical cloud of feathers behind the van. Their response was not to improve their coop, but to spray paint SLOW DOWN on the road, which is [a minor, admittedly irrelevant form of] vandalism. They did in fact do a crap job so it does in fact look like shit.
These are some people who wanted to live on a dirt road in bumfuck, but when civilization showed up, they didn't move. And let me tell you, their place is a crap little shit-shack, but they could have sold it to a grower and slid out of there long before now, and surely made a massive profit. They could move to some other shit-shack in this shitty town and actually improve their situation but they're married to a particular shitty piece of ground. And instead of making themselves happy, they're standing against the tide and being upset about it.
But civilization always arrives, and if I'd hit that chicken with the front of the vehicle and damaged the plastics, they'd have been liable because civilization recognizes that you can't have chickens running around the road. Instead of moving to where people won't be going by so fast, they demand that everyone else alter their behavior to please them. And the reality is that they could be living someplace nicer if they weren't so addicted to false stability. That little piece of ground could be wiped out by anything next week; since they have grossly inadequate clearings and fire danger has been increasing year on year, fire is a likely candidate. They have no security whatsoever in their tin box that could be opened with a can opener.
Maybe you were raised with a silver spoon in your mouth, with zero experience of the actual struggles and concerns of the majority of working American families.
Well, I was raised with beans and rice in my mouth, and I still think it's bullshit. You don't have a right to make the world stop around you. The only people I feel bad for in SF are the young people trying to get out. They haven't had time to make any money, and it's difficult to make any money in SF while paying living expenses. People pay for part of a room (often one which doubles as a hallway in the crappy floor plans of the narrow dwellings of SF) for what I pay for half a house (shared with my lady.) How is a youth going to climb out of that money well?
Is the TSA kidnapping people now also?
Kidnapping. False imprisonment. Theft. Rape. Fraud. The TSA is an agency specifically created to engage in felonious behavior, and it does.
People erroneously think SF is a metropolis, like NY - it's not. By that standard, there's more late night food places in Ogden, Utah, than there is in SF.
It used to be, or at least, it was more like NY than it is now. But late-night stuff has been driven out of the city by gentrification. You could at least find stuff to do on the weekend nights, before.
So unless you are an alcoholic or a "club kid", you are not living in SF for the thriving night life.
Alcoholics are accommodated pretty much everywhere (except maybe Utah) but club kids live in LA or SD, where they actually still have clubs. They shut down all the good ones in the city, so the last ones left are not only shitty but shitty and crowded.
That is the fundamental flaw of property taxes - the taxes can go up even if your property stayed exactly the same just because a bunch of people around you overpaid.
That's not a flaw. You don't in fact have a natural right to private property. And since we live in a capitalist society, money is used to decide who gets to have scarce things. The flaw lies in the distribution of wealth. If people who are superassholes weren't rewarded with economic success, then you wouldn't have the superassholes living in all the nice spots and so on.