RedDenver

Check out Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas, which describes why the elites controlling charities isn't a good thing (even if they truly intend it to be). You can also find online videos of him describing the issues.

A majority of Americans don't think the 70% sounds crazy and are in fact in favor of it. Poll: A majority of Americans support raising the top tax rate to 70 percent

I'm hoping Schultz gets some non-Trump Republicans to vote for him. But I doubt he'll even be running 3 months from now. First, I think he's just trying to drum up sales for his book. Second, I doubt there's many people in the "center". Third, unfortunately the 2 major parties have a stranglehold on the Presidential election and an independent or third party will be lucky to get 1% of the vote, let alone even a single Electoral Vote.

One of my favorite expressions.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the spending bill passed both the House and the Senate and then Trump vetoed it.

I haven't played either, but my buddy really disliked The Division 2 but liked The Division 1.

Do you mean no PvP on the year one roadmap?

Or just pass a law that says if Congress has enough votes to override a veto, then the President can't veto that bill. Then we don't have to go through the stupidity of watching members of Congress backtrack because the President disagreed.

I'm only half serious, but the federal government can bailout the state governments if we want that to happen and vote for it and pressure our elected officials.

I'm not buying that. The football team has its own weight room, so it makes no sense for Riley to make the effort to force them to workout elsewhere.

But how dumb was it to give Foxconn a $4 billion tax break? The company predictably didn't meet the promises it had made when securing the tax break. A lesson for Virginia and New York on the Amazon 2nd HQ? (I mean, there's no such thing as a 2nd HQ, let alone two separate 2nd HQ's, so they should already be pretty suspicious of Amazon's claims.)

You're missing what I'm implying - that we could have not had tax cuts and instead funded the state pensions and have the same amount of deficit.

I'm not sure, but it's bad for small-d democracy.

W.T.F.

You're welcome, skers83!

After a good year at OG, I feel I'd make an excellent RB this year. Like the Fridge carrying the ball.

Second

Sure does

$$$

Have you seen any Trump supporters leave him or even begin to question him? The moderate Republicans I know either didn't support Trump from the beginning or left him shortly after the election. The hardcore Republicans in my family back in Nebraska don't question him or won't talk about him except to say stupid stuff like, "He tells it like it is!"

7% is the historical stock market average when accounting for inflation. So 7.5% is a bit high, but that average is very misleading because yearly volatility is also very high, which means no investor should be counting on a particular return in any given year but rather an average return over a period of 10+ years.

The states have a $1.4 trillion shortfall, and the tax cuts caused a $1.4 trillion deficit. Hmmm...

Second

Definitely not a stroke

I agree with you that'd be great, but I think it's more wishful thinking than reality with the politicians we've got.