UJRefugees.net

Evil.Fkn.Mean,Nasty wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:07 pm

it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:59 pm it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

So, you recommend only taxing the very rich and giving all of that to the poor? Interesting. Basically socialism. That's not all that surprising.

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:17 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:59 pm it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

So, you recommend only taxing the very rich and giving all of that to the poor? Interesting. Basically socialism. That's not all that surprising.

But you're all for the government letting a for profit corporation using eminent domain to help their business? It sure as fuck ain't capitalism.

spudoc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:23 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:17 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:59 pm it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

So, you recommend only taxing the very rich and giving all of that to the poor? Interesting. Basically socialism. That's not all that surprising.

But you're all for the government letting a for profit corporation using eminent domain to help their business? It sure as fuck ain't capitalism.

In certain instances I think its necessary. If you need 75 acres and some of it is in a congested area where there are multiple owners and the existing situation generates very little tax income and some of the properties are close to a condemned state, its a win win for everyone. Obviously the people getting bought out are going to make it sound like its the end of the world. Because that's the negotiating tactic to get the most money for the property during a condemnation. I think it is a tactic that should be used with great caution, but I think its also a very necessary part of a city optimizing their tax base.

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:29 pm

spudoc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:23 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:17 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:59 pm it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

So, you recommend only taxing the very rich and giving all of that to the poor? Interesting. Basically socialism. That's not all that surprising.

But you're all for the government letting a for profit corporation using eminent domain to help their business? It sure as fuck ain't capitalism.

In certain instances I think its necessary. If you need 75 acres and some of it is in a congested area where there are multiple owners and the existing situation generates very little tax income and some of the properties are close to a condemned state, its a win win for everyone. Obviously the people getting bought out are going to make it sound like its the end of the world. Because that's the negotiating tactic to get the most money for the property during a condemnation. I think it is a tactic that should be used with great caution, but I think its also a very necessary part of a city optimizing their tax base.

If the city is going to do something that benefits everyone with the process, like a road, police station, park etc then fine. But to carry the water for a corporation, who in this instance didn't come close to providing the promised benefits, is total shit.

spudoc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:48 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:29 pm

spudoc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:23 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:17 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:59 pm it might come as a surprise to you, but nations have an obligation to provide for the majority of their citizens. And, sometimes, that means they have to make hard decisions that don't sit well for some people in that nation. Its called taxing the small amount of people who have half of the money. And doing what is best for the majority. Its how democracies work.

So, you recommend only taxing the very rich and giving all of that to the poor? Interesting. Basically socialism. That's not all that surprising.

But you're all for the government letting a for profit corporation using eminent domain to help their business? It sure as fuck ain't capitalism.

In certain instances I think its necessary. If you need 75 acres and some of it is in a congested area where there are multiple owners and the existing situation generates very little tax income and some of the properties are close to a condemned state, its a win win for everyone. Obviously the people getting bought out are going to make it sound like its the end of the world. Because that's the negotiating tactic to get the most money for the property during a condemnation. I think it is a tactic that should be used with great caution, but I think its also a very necessary part of a city optimizing their tax base.

If the city is going to do something that benefits everyone with the process, like a road, police station, park etc then fine. But to carry the water for a corporation, who in this instance didn't come close to providing the promised benefits, is total shit.

well, the key words in that sentence are "promised benefits". I don't know jack shit about the fine print or the deal they negotiated with the city. My experience with City Council's is that they are not elected because of their negotiating and finance skills. Regardless, at the time of the "eminent domain" negotiation, the city must have been pleased with the "promised benefits". And they must have known there was some speculation involved in what those benefits might actually be. And I would suppose the outcome could have been MORE or LESS than promised. These things happen all of the time. Sometimes they work out 10x better than the city had hoped. Sometimes they end up sucking. That's just part of it. The City of Arlington has hit home runs negotiating deals for the Cowboy's stadium, the Ranger's ballpark, etc. They have literally stolen away millions of $ in tax money from Dallas because Dallas was too short sighted to do exactly what you are bitching about. Dallas could have taken a neighborhood that is known more for its crime than its tax income and turned it into something magnificent.

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:35 pm Or........... it could have been that the highway people look for the cheapest land and the people most willing to sell. Everything doesn't have to be done with a racist intention.

Read up on the Santa Monica Freeway and the Sugarhill neighborhood of LA. They cut up a historic and prosperous black neighborhood to save Fraternity and Sorority row at USC. I think we can all agree there is no better place for a Fraternity than below a freeway overpass.

Burn1dwn wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:35 am

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:35 pm Or........... it could have been that the highway people look for the cheapest land and the people most willing to sell. Everything doesn't have to be done with a racist intention.

Read up on the Santa Monica Freeway and the Sugarhill neighborhood of LA. They cut up a historic and prosperous black neighborhood to save Fraternity and Sorority row at USC. I think we can all agree there is no better place for a Fraternity than below a freeway overpass.

On this I couldn’t agree more. What a bunch of assholes.

I know it's fake, but we all know this is what they mean.

That’s WTC / FSF crossbreed level stupid.

Antknot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:54 pm

FFS

Antknot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:54 pm

She is a fucking idiot

Hate on Rethugs.....hate on.

Stapes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 5:51 pm Hate on Rethugs.....hate on.

The Liar-in-Chief is trying to spend the entire US budget on 2 bills in his first 100 days. Insane.