methodical

It's harassment, either way, he's right on that and he's right it should be condemned, but... then he's using it as a soapbox to assign blame and condemn the entire left, like we all collectively chipped in to send her a huge dick (when lets be honest, she's got a few hundred of them already in the building with her everyday, including him). It should be referred to law enforcement and the individual responsible should be dealt with that way, same as any other threats or inappropriate harassment.

No way, that wouldn't be like the republican party i know at all, duping the poor with 'fiscal conservatism' and promising them tax cuts so they could really cut taxes for their best friends, the richest among us. I don't believe it, those honorable men wouldn't do that! /s Republican voters are the same bumpkins that would've lost all their money to "rain machines" during the dust-bowl.

What's going to happen with these idiots holding open carry events in places with a bunch of people opposing them is sooner or later some crazy person is going do something that scares them into "defending themselves" and we're going to see a panicked group of idiots open fire on a group unarmed people. That's happened even with trained people behind the guns.

grew up with the big 8 and its still a big NO from me. The big 10 is a much better conference to be a part of. Seriously, I don't even miss the big 8 at this point, I miss the success Nebraska was having back then for sure, but don't care one bit about the old "rivalries." Nebraska just needs to start winning games that matter again.

My theory is they get upset because it's uncomfortable for them that these family members of victims of gun violence remind them that their fervor for permissive gun laws is at least partially responsible for these deaths. If that's not it, it should be, as massacring school children should elicit more of a response then a shrug by the electorate and hollow prayers from politicians publicly while they privately just stick their hands out for more money from the gun lobby. You'd have to be really really dense to not understand exactly why parents of school shooting victims are on capitol hill. They want these policymakers to publicly have to look them in the face to remind them that there are consequences to their votes. That's the capital they have to lobby with, since they don't have the deep pockets and backrooms the NRA does. Which should be a thousand times more awkward, it just isn't in public view, and that is a shame.

There'd be absolutely no benefit to Nebraska in any way. I doubt anyone would want a backup quarterback who doesn't want to be on the team and it sure wouldn't be great for the locker room and even if there was any sort of impropriety how would you prove and pursue that legally? and you're right it'd look petty at the very least. It is what it is and it's better for all parties to move on. Best of luck to the young man, he can do whatever he feels is right for him. Who here should really care?, its not like Nebraska is some jilted lover but some fans are acting like this is some huge betrayal. It's not, it's yet another way the college game is reflecting the pros with transfer free agency, especially for quarterbacks. Lets get this season started already.

On the bright side, the internet has made it easier than ever before to learn about that stuff on whenever you may need it. I can't think of a home/appliance repair I haven't at least looked up on youtube to learn by watching pros before either deciding to do it myself or hire it done. Usually it comes down to "do I have the tools to do this safely? would it cost less to get them and do it myself? do I actually have the time? would it involve being up high? :p" So really, if the will to learn is there, the information is out there and available to anyone. We had a "personal finance" style class in my high-school. It was where the kids who couldn't hack anymore advanced math ended up in their final year and was basically a bookkeeping/accounting class. It seemed like my friends taking it thought it was a pretty big waste of time basically going back into arithmetic at the end of high-school. It's not that people don't have the education or ability to understand basic finances would be my guess. Although I doubt many understand the compounding interest stuff in practice. Although to answer your question, I'd say none of the day should be taken up by that stuff. High school should be focusing on preparing students for higher education and broadening their exposure to different subjects, because frankly high-school isn't enough anymore and hasn't been for nearly 30 years.

Ohh lord. If you are manipulating the data you are falsifying it. This is that same old tired republican playbook crap "You can make statistics say anything!" No, you can't do that without it being verifiable that you are lying by falsifying data. This is why their style of argument works so well on the stupid and the lazy that only trust the republican propaganda arms, they'll never go verify it on their own. Next you'll tell us that whatever data scientist gathered the data did so because they were paid to get only the data that represented the Obama administration well and they have a vested interest in keeping their grant funding or some equally ridiculous load of horse s#!t that shows the general lack of understanding of data and science by the majority of the republican sheep who treat it like its some sort of medieval sorcery. The economy hasn't exploded in one direction or another, its remained basically fluctuating at the rate where it's been through most of the previous few years before Trump, until the summer where things seem to have leveled off and that's with the massive corporate welfare of the tax cuts. In the latter part of this year and into next we'll get to see what happens with the shooting himself in the foot with tariffs. The article you posted wasn't an article, it was excerpts from an un-credited editorial from investors business daily. Where you'll find other gems such as "Russian Collusion: It was Hillary all along" or "When it comes to the environment, These are the good ole days" and their claim to fame is having to print a retraction in an editorial arguing against single payer health care that said that Stephen Hawking "wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the [British] National Health Service (NHS) would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless." So why aren't we all acknowledging your article? Because it's not from the mainstream source you're trying to represent it as, its an opinion piece from a right wing blog site and its conclusions are questionable at best and not backed up by anything beyond the opinion of whoever wrote it.

Shifting from one logical fallacy to another (from "argument from ignorance" - where you try to shift the burden of proof to "relevancy fallacy" + an ad-hominem attack- where you cite with schumer's statements and voting record as indefensible ) doesn't prove your point, on the contrary, it proves how weak the arguments you make are because you aren't capable of backing up things with sources that have any sort of factual basis or evidence.

And it wasn't needed then. We already had a federal agency doing that job.

The way I view it, there needs to be a public campaign for publicly funded elections and a ban on outside political donations and PACs. If that actually happened, then more of those things would probably happen, but until you take the moneyed special interests out of the equation they will always hold sway enough to make a few well placed "donations" and torpedo any of those things or fund candidates to go torpedo them after they would be implemented by cutting funding. It's that old saying, follow the money, until politicians are dependent on their actual electorate for the funding they need to stay elected, they sure as hell aren't working for us.

Trump was being truthful, he just didn't add the second part out loud, but it was "Into me and my associate's bank accounts."

It's amazing how they are trying to FUD their own report. How can you out FUD the system they've built where people are afraid to see the doctor because nobody knows what the hell it'll end up costing them even with insurance, which we already pay out the nose for and the price keeps going up while coverage keeps going down.

They aren't shutting down anything. They are removing it's access to their platforms for TOS violations. Infowars is free to go on. It's followers are free to keep buying masculinity enhancing supplements from the pinnacle of male health himself, Alex Jones. They'll just have to do it on their own website.

Trump is a narcissist, character means something else to him. Just like "fake news" is all news that doesn't try to make it look like the sun shines out his ass, people with good character are people that can do something for him and are 'loyal' to him, doesn't matter if they are actually criminals.

They aren't all that similar. The thing with all incidents in an organization is if you try to bury them they are far worse and add a conspiracy on top of the crime which makes a scandal. It takes leadership to actually confront things instead of trying to bury those skeletons in a closet and Meyer failed that, multiple times. That being said, LP wouldn't get a second chance in this day and age nor would any other player guilty of domestic violence or sexual assault and it wouldn't be left up to a coaches discretion, no matter how legendary. It shouldn't have been in this case either and took massive failures by their Athletic Department as a whole, their Title IX staff, Coaching staff, etc to end up how it did. If Urban ends up being fired, its not his scumbag WR coach that did him in, it's him, and his decision to protect him because of who his family was.

Having very far right idiot republicans take up the mantel of Anon and follow someone posting under the moniker 'Q' and not understanding that basically Anon has existed solely to troll stupid people and Q is from the 90s star trek shows and was basically an omnipotent troublemaker that messed with people for his own whims, is idk what, weird to say the least. Sad that their gullibility knows no depths even when it should be transparent that they are being taken for a ride to give some people a big laugh at how stupid they are.

Who? this evil evil man that corrupts children?

Hey look at that, moving the goalposts again.

It would also have the secondary benefit of making high frequency trading less profitable. Where firms buy access to be close to the exchanges so they can perform milliseconds of arbitrage to skim off the top of trades going through the system.

Shouldn't be that hard to figure out, round about. So that article says approximately 3.2 trillion a year for medicare for everyone. That would eliminate premiums, deductibles, co-pays, co-insurance (you know when you meet the deductible and still have to cover a percentage up to an out of pocket maximum). But lets forget about co-pays and co-insurance. In 2016, the average single person payed 321 a month or 3,852 a year and had a deductible of 4,358, so if you actually used your insurance you were out 8,210 out of pocket. We had a 91.2 % health care coverage in the US in 2016 and a population of 322,179,605, so 293,827,799.76 insured people for at least some of the year. So if those people used their medical coverage, they'd have payed out approximately 2.412 trillion dollars, before taking into account things like co-pays and co-insurance. If they never saw a doctor they still shelled out 1.24 trillon, just in premiums. In 2017 we spent 3.4 trillion total on healthcare according to: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/06/how-we-spend-3400000000000/530355/ So I guess bottom line for me is you get what you pay for. Right now we pay a lot of money for companies to rip us off and give us s#!t coverage that we're still liable for high deductibles that most people cant afford anyways. I know I'd rather not go to a doctor because I know it'll cost an arm and a leg out of pocket, even on an employer plan. We're basically at a point where our money would be better spent to break us out of this system, where we aren't liable for portions of medical bills or fearful of the financial ruin having to pay a deductible might cause let alone maybe having to hit an out of pocket maximum for something major, where we aren't tied to a crappy job because we'll lose our health care through our employer, and a million other reasons. But it won't happen because most of America's "f#&% you, I don't want MY MONEY to pay for you!" attitude towards things. It's a shame. Edit: obviously these are really rough estimates.

Many of the richest people do work, they either got lucky with starting a company that exploded in value, or they spent a lifetime running them and building their wealth. It's a distinction for me between the I guess well off vs the actual rich. Yeah 5 million could support a comfortable life if you had it invested but that's not what I think of as rich I guess. I see that as more in the 10+ million net-worth range and the super rich as closing in on 100million and beyond. The latter are the people that are pushing tax policies that benefit them and have families that will be forever generationally wealthy if managed smartly. 5 million is a nice comfortable maybe semi-early retirement with a decent, albeit not forever lasting chunk of money to give left over.

You'd start to actually see the advantages with income beyond 500k/year after you hit the upper bracket of taxes, so I'd probably say around there. So around 42k/month is probably actually rich on the income scale. Obviously it's possible to become wealthy making far less than that and building it smartly over time, or being insanely lucky, but you aren't getting into super rich territory, ever, on even a high earner's salary. Nor are you seeing the tax advantages before that.

Of course, although if you are running a business obviously you'd be silly to not take advantage of it and it's not like society sees no benefit from things like buildings being built or equipment being purchased then depreciated or charitable giving (although some charities are questionable) and lowering someone's tax liability. It's when you get into things like offshore money in tax havens that tax avoidance starts to be malicious to the society someone lives in, in my mind at least.

I was going to include that in my post, but ended up deleting it because compensation type really isn't the issue in either case. Cash or not, without loopholes it's still taxable income. The issue is that taxes are a linear function at the top and are always a linear function when you are talking about capital gains which is how wealth is made and stored, but that wealth is gained exponentially. It simply makes sense for people after a certain level of income to focus on gaining wealth/net worth. They don't need more cash to fund their lifestyle and wealth grows as investments with time but loses value as cash. It's funny, at least to me, that republicans seem so enamored with 1950s society in their "return to greatness", but that they never mention the tax policy in place that funded that society where income tax brackets went up to basically 90%, so the burden was spread much more equitably across the board as a percentage of an individual's total income. In any case, we deserve what we get when we go to the polls and vote the people in that make promises of giving us all more money without understanding the details or consequences of such policies or fall for overly simplistic arguments against things when we don't take a minute to look at who actually benefits the most from whatever they are pedaling and why their benefactors would be pushing for that. Tax policy is how we've made the inequality of our times not only possible, but the inevitable outcome. As a society, until we can stop being short sighted when it comes to fairly basic mathematical principles our own greed will continue to be used against the majority of us for the benefit of the few.