|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 19 2017 07:04 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 06:41 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 06:35 farvacola wrote:
And there it is again, "clearly mutually exclusive" as though this spiel isn't straight Likud party sycophancy.
Lol. Are you actually going to make an argument or are you just going to continue to embarrass yourself with idiotic and baseless sniping? We can't make an argument against what you're saying. If your premises are true, you are correct. Of course your premises are aberrant, but you will never engage on your premises because the reason why they are premises in the first place is because you have carefully worded your arguments so that they are premises and not points to be engaged.
Why do you think that I won't engage on a discussion of my premises? For example, feel free to argue why I am incorrect in stating that Israel and Palestine will never coexist peacefully.
|
On December 19 2017 07:37 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:32 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:29 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:26 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:12 Plansix wrote:
The party I love about all of this is that people think Israel will stop doing what they are doing and end the conflict quicker. Our grandchildren will be taking sides in the conflict as the meek numbers of Palestinians slowly die out and have their final property right revoked. Israel is on the path to victory. It is attrition. Their plan is to watch the Palestinians die off behind walls, with poor services and lack of opportunity.
Trump gave them what they wanted and got nothing beyond more enemies. palestinian numbers have been steadily increasing (and the owrse their conditions, the faster their population growth rate, rather ironically, but actually to be expected based on international comparison) I'm sure Israel will find a solution to that, like evicting Palestinians that have to many children or just removing children all together. They just need to find the right moment to make their move. israel has been at this for a long time; if they haven' found a way to do so by now, they aren' tgoing to. They just need more time to make us comfortable with the idea. That it's best Palestinians children to not live there. the reason they don' tdo it has nothin to do with us; and everything to do with themselves. from an objective standpoint, it would be best if palestinians would stop having so many children, but that's clearly not going to happen. i'll just mark you down as a hater for the other side, since tha'ts how you're actin and what you are. zlefin, the only reason they have driven all the Palestinians out is because they know it would cost them US support and a lot of the support from the West. We are the only reason they don't push harder. I disagree, and would say you're quite clearly wrong. you're just a hater really. and your hate is blinding yuo to the more complex reailty of the situation.
Not at all. I’ve followed it for most of my adult life and seen Israel’s politics shift and what people have run on. And those people keep getting elected and their party is in power. Peace hasn’t been on the table for a long time now.
|
On December 19 2017 07:22 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:17 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 06:59 IyMoon wrote:On December 19 2017 06:57 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 06:52 Simberto wrote:On December 19 2017 06:46 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 06:37 Slydie wrote:On December 19 2017 06:30 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 06:28 farvacola wrote:On December 19 2017 06:25 Jockmcplop wrote:
[quote]
Are you suggesting that Palestinians are terrorists?
Everywhere I try to discuss this i see Palestinians portrayed as a braying mob of anti American terrorists who want nothing more than to wage war against the West at all times.
Actually, as you'd know if you had met any, Palestinians are a fairly liberal bunch of people who just want to be able to let their kids go outside without them getting arrested and tortured for a few months.
AIPAC has been doing its best to dehumanize the Palestinians for decades; with folks like the Daunt and Ren eating out of their dirty hands, one can take their efforts as successful. It's not about dehumanizing Palestinians. That's quite besides the point. The real question is in what universe will the Palestinians EVER be pro-American? The obvious answer is that they will never be, so we should unequivocally support Israel. Israel is supported by the big christian population in the US mainly for religeous reasons, and therefore Israel can get away with everything. In other western countries, the Palestinians have more support, as they are the oppressed underdogs in the conflict. Also, be careful about overestimating Trump's symbolic recognicion of Jerusalem. There is no international support for his action, and actually does not matter much I don't really care about whether Trump has domestic support for the action or why. My only concern is what is good for the US. Israel is an ally and should be treated as such. The Palestinians will never be allies. For that reason alone, the US should dispense with this fiction of trying to be "fair" on the Israel/Palestine issue. Nor do I care what other Western countries think. They aren't going to throw the US overboard on account of Palestine for the same reasons that the Saudis and other Arab powers won't. The bottom line is that no one really cares about the Palestinians. Might makes right is such a wonderful ethical framework. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. And it is so incredibly shortsighted. Do you really think that you are so isolated from anyone else in the world that pissing everyone off will never have negative consequences? Like I have infamously argued before, ethics and morality aren't the ends of rational foreign policy. The self-interest of the nation is. So how is it not in the self interest of the USA to full stop 100% switch support from Israel ( a hated party in the ME) to Palestine (one that isnt) Israel is a pro-American nuclear power. That alone should be dispositive. Israel is only pro-American because we support them. We could easily make Palestine pro American
The Palestinians are poor and will never be a power -- much less a nuclear power -- as long as Israel exists. So what is in it for the US to abandon Israel in favor of Palestine at this point?
|
On December 19 2017 07:41 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:37 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:32 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:29 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:26 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:12 Plansix wrote:
The party I love about all of this is that people think Israel will stop doing what they are doing and end the conflict quicker. Our grandchildren will be taking sides in the conflict as the meek numbers of Palestinians slowly die out and have their final property right revoked. Israel is on the path to victory. It is attrition. Their plan is to watch the Palestinians die off behind walls, with poor services and lack of opportunity.
Trump gave them what they wanted and got nothing beyond more enemies. palestinian numbers have been steadily increasing (and the owrse their conditions, the faster their population growth rate, rather ironically, but actually to be expected based on international comparison) I'm sure Israel will find a solution to that, like evicting Palestinians that have to many children or just removing children all together. They just need to find the right moment to make their move. israel has been at this for a long time; if they haven' found a way to do so by now, they aren' tgoing to. They just need more time to make us comfortable with the idea. That it's best Palestinians children to not live there. the reason they don' tdo it has nothin to do with us; and everything to do with themselves. from an objective standpoint, it would be best if palestinians would stop having so many children, but that's clearly not going to happen. i'll just mark you down as a hater for the other side, since tha'ts how you're actin and what you are. zlefin, the only reason they have driven all the Palestinians out is because they know it would cost them US support and a lot of the support from the West. We are the only reason they don't push harder. I disagree, and would say you're quite clearly wrong. you're just a hater really. and your hate is blinding yuo to the more complex reailty of the situation. Not at all. I’ve followed it for most of my adult life and seen Israel’s politics shift and what people have run on. And those people keep getting elected and their party is in power. Peace hasn’t been on the table for a long time now.
ok, so you're just bein gdumb then. just because peace isn't on the table (which is also false, peace IS on the table, it's just that there aren't mutually agreeable terms for such a peace, especially with large segments of palestinians bein gvery unwilling to have a peace), doesn't mean that all means of killing are acceptable.
|
xDaunt do you think the US gains more in this case than it loses by taking unilateral action directly against the will of the international community, and why?
Does the will of the international community mean anything at all this case in your opinion?
|
Video released by a small, Florida police department shows a 93-year-old woman being forcefully evicted from her home prior to being arrested after she refused to leave.
The nonagenarian was evicted after she fell allegedly behind on rent.
According to the Eustis Police Department (“EPD”), Juanita Fitzgerald was repeatedly asked to pack up her belongings and clear out of the Franklin House specialized living community but she refused to do so.
Deputies on the scene claim Fitzgerald said she wouldn’t leave unless carried out. So, that’s apparently what happened.
In the video, which is difficult to watch, Fitzgerald repeatedly screams as police manhandle her. She exclaims, visibly in pain:
Ow, God, you’re hurting me! Ow! Oww!
As the police attempted to remove Fitzgerald from the building, the elderly woman slid out of her mobility chair and onto the ground. The scene is chaotic as multiple officers attempt to constrain the woman.
It is presently unclear whether Fitzgerald was injured during the forced removal.
The arrest charge given to Fitzgerald was for trespassing. After being processed by the EPD, Fitzgerald was released and turned over to a caretaker.
lawandcrime.com
(Apparently this lady does have money and refused to pay. Also turned down assistance from a bevy of organizations)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/elderly-woman-handcuffed-jail-refuse-leave-care-home-93-year-old-juanita-fitzgerald-florida-lake-a8111736.html
|
On December 19 2017 07:35 Ryzel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 07:13 Ryzel wrote:
xDaunt when you say self-interest of the nation, are you referring to what is objectively best for the nation? Or rather what is in the collective, subjective interest of the citizens of the nation? That depends upon the form of government. Right, that's what I thought. So, given the following premises (which you can feel free to rebutt)... 1. The rational US nation's self-interest is defined by the subjective whims of elected officials. 2. At least some of these elected officials are influenced by the principles of ethics and morality. Ergo, it is rational for the US, and other nations with the same form of government, to have their self-interest at least partially defined by ethics and morality?
Your argument doesn't really follow from the premises that you have set forth. Here's what you should be arguing: "the nation should act morally and ethically because it is in the self-interest of the nation to do so." Now, while I'll stipulate that it may sometimes be in the nation's self-interest to act morally and ethically, this coincidence does not rebut my ultimate point acting morally and ethically still is not the ultimate end of the nation's foreign policy. Self-interest ultimately is, which is why there is no shortage of instances where nations do things that aren't moral or ethical.
|
I see the job creation has already started! Hurrah!
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/
Since the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on December 2, 29 companies have announced $70.2 billion in stock buybacks, a maneuver that uses company cash to buy its own shares, which then drives up the price of those shares, rewarding major investors and executives whose compensation is directly tied to the company’s stock price.
The figure comes from a new report by Senate Democrats, which relies on the public statements of company executives. Stock buybacks, meanwhile, had been declining. There were $120 billion in buybacks in the entire second quarter of 2017, among all companies. The new figure — $70.2 billion in just 10 days, from just 29 companies — suggests that a surge of buybacks is in the offing if the tax bill becomes official, representing a staggering transfer of wealth from taxpayers straight to the wealthy.
|
On December 19 2017 07:44 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:41 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:37 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:32 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:29 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:26 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:12 Plansix wrote:
The party I love about all of this is that people think Israel will stop doing what they are doing and end the conflict quicker. Our grandchildren will be taking sides in the conflict as the meek numbers of Palestinians slowly die out and have their final property right revoked. Israel is on the path to victory. It is attrition. Their plan is to watch the Palestinians die off behind walls, with poor services and lack of opportunity.
Trump gave them what they wanted and got nothing beyond more enemies. palestinian numbers have been steadily increasing (and the owrse their conditions, the faster their population growth rate, rather ironically, but actually to be expected based on international comparison) I'm sure Israel will find a solution to that, like evicting Palestinians that have to many children or just removing children all together. They just need to find the right moment to make their move. israel has been at this for a long time; if they haven' found a way to do so by now, they aren' tgoing to. They just need more time to make us comfortable with the idea. That it's best Palestinians children to not live there. the reason they don' tdo it has nothin to do with us; and everything to do with themselves. from an objective standpoint, it would be best if palestinians would stop having so many children, but that's clearly not going to happen. i'll just mark you down as a hater for the other side, since tha'ts how you're actin and what you are. zlefin, the only reason they have driven all the Palestinians out is because they know it would cost them US support and a lot of the support from the West. We are the only reason they don't push harder. I disagree, and would say you're quite clearly wrong. you're just a hater really. and your hate is blinding yuo to the more complex reailty of the situation. Not at all. I’ve followed it for most of my adult life and seen Israel’s politics shift and what people have run on. And those people keep getting elected and their party is in power. Peace hasn’t been on the table for a long time now. ok, so you're just bein gdumb then. just because peace isn't on the table (which is also false, peace IS on the table, it's just that there aren't mutually agreeable terms for such a peace), doesn't mean that all means of killing are acceptable.
I’m just not naïve about Israel’s intension.
|
On December 19 2017 07:44 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:41 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:37 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:32 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:29 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:26 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:12 Plansix wrote:
The party I love about all of this is that people think Israel will stop doing what they are doing and end the conflict quicker. Our grandchildren will be taking sides in the conflict as the meek numbers of Palestinians slowly die out and have their final property right revoked. Israel is on the path to victory. It is attrition. Their plan is to watch the Palestinians die off behind walls, with poor services and lack of opportunity.
Trump gave them what they wanted and got nothing beyond more enemies. palestinian numbers have been steadily increasing (and the owrse their conditions, the faster their population growth rate, rather ironically, but actually to be expected based on international comparison) I'm sure Israel will find a solution to that, like evicting Palestinians that have to many children or just removing children all together. They just need to find the right moment to make their move. israel has been at this for a long time; if they haven' found a way to do so by now, they aren' tgoing to. They just need more time to make us comfortable with the idea. That it's best Palestinians children to not live there. the reason they don' tdo it has nothin to do with us; and everything to do with themselves. from an objective standpoint, it would be best if palestinians would stop having so many children, but that's clearly not going to happen. i'll just mark you down as a hater for the other side, since tha'ts how you're actin and what you are. zlefin, the only reason they have driven all the Palestinians out is because they know it would cost them US support and a lot of the support from the West. We are the only reason they don't push harder. I disagree, and would say you're quite clearly wrong. you're just a hater really. and your hate is blinding yuo to the more complex reailty of the situation. Not at all. I’ve followed it for most of my adult life and seen Israel’s politics shift and what people have run on. And those people keep getting elected and their party is in power. Peace hasn’t been on the table for a long time now. ok, so you're just bein gdumb then. just because peace isn't on the table (which is also false, peace IS on the table, it's just that there aren't mutually agreeable terms for such a peace), doesn't mean that all means of killing are acceptable.
Honestly zlefin you can see where I'm coming from in this situation but the story is one of inevitable destruction for Palestinians.
The problem is that no-one can bring themselves to call this what it is: A slow burning humanitarian crisis, caused by Western interests, that we have a duty to solve in the most compassionate way possible.
Simply putting all of our weight behind Israel is the opposite of what we should be doing. If anything its an impossible conundrum because I'm sure most Palestinians would rather die in their homeland than be forced to relocate with no plan, and with Hamas controlling the destiny of such a large number of them they will never relocate anyway.
The absolute worst thing we can do is simply write the Palestinians off as terrorists and try to help Israel slowly exterminate them, but no-one is proposing anything better.
Its just fucking horrible.
|
On December 19 2017 07:48 Logo wrote:I see the job creation has already started! Hurrah! https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/Show nested quote +
Since the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on December 2, 29 companies have announced $70.2 billion in stock buybacks, a maneuver that uses company cash to buy its own shares, which then drives up the price of those shares, rewarding major investors and executives whose compensation is directly tied to the company’s stock price.
The figure comes from a new report by Senate Democrats, which relies on the public statements of company executives. Stock buybacks, meanwhile, had been declining. There were $120 billion in buybacks in the entire second quarter of 2017, among all companies. The new figure — $70.2 billion in just 10 days, from just 29 companies — suggests that a surge of buybacks is in the offing if the tax bill becomes official, representing a staggering transfer of wealth from taxpayers straight to the wealthy.
I see financial ignorance still hasn't stopped! Huzzah!
|
On December 19 2017 07:48 Logo wrote:I see the job creation has already started! Hurrah! https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/Show nested quote +
Since the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on December 2, 29 companies have announced $70.2 billion in stock buybacks, a maneuver that uses company cash to buy its own shares, which then drives up the price of those shares, rewarding major investors and executives whose compensation is directly tied to the company’s stock price.
The figure comes from a new report by Senate Democrats, which relies on the public statements of company executives. Stock buybacks, meanwhile, had been declining. There were $120 billion in buybacks in the entire second quarter of 2017, among all companies. The new figure — $70.2 billion in just 10 days, from just 29 companies — suggests that a surge of buybacks is in the offing if the tax bill becomes official, representing a staggering transfer of wealth from taxpayers straight to the wealthy.
Corporations will use tax cuts to make more jobs!
Oh wait, they used to to pay investors and their own senior management, if only someone could have predicted this.
Sad.
|
On December 19 2017 07:51 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:48 Logo wrote:I see the job creation has already started! Hurrah! https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/
Since the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on December 2, 29 companies have announced $70.2 billion in stock buybacks, a maneuver that uses company cash to buy its own shares, which then drives up the price of those shares, rewarding major investors and executives whose compensation is directly tied to the company’s stock price.
The figure comes from a new report by Senate Democrats, which relies on the public statements of company executives. Stock buybacks, meanwhile, had been declining. There were $120 billion in buybacks in the entire second quarter of 2017, among all companies. The new figure — $70.2 billion in just 10 days, from just 29 companies — suggests that a surge of buybacks is in the offing if the tax bill becomes official, representing a staggering transfer of wealth from taxpayers straight to the wealthy.
Corporations will use tax cuts to make more jobs! Oh wait, they used to to pay investors and their own senior management, if only someone could have predicted this. Sad.
They literally said they would do this when investors asked. But I'm sure that money will somehow turn into jobs and not be packed away in tax free nest eggs.
|
On December 19 2017 07:44 Jockmcplop wrote:
xDaunt do you think the US gains more in this case than it loses by taking unilateral action directly against the will of the international community, and why?
Does the will of the international community mean anything at all this case in your opinion?
Yes, I do. This kind of action, even if it is mostly symbolic, will empower Israel and strengthen its position in the Middle East, which is good for America. In contrast, I do not see any cost to the action. The international community may bitch publicly, but nothing will come of it. There could be an uptick in terrorism, but I doubt that it will be particularly meaningful and anyone who is prone to becoming radicalized over something like this needs to be killed anyway, so let's just get it over with.
|
On December 19 2017 07:49 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:44 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:41 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:37 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:32 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:29 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:26 zlefin wrote:On December 19 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 zlefin wrote:
[quote]
palestinian numbers have been steadily increasing (and the owrse their conditions, the faster their population growth rate, rather ironically, but actually to be expected based on international comparison) I'm sure Israel will find a solution to that, like evicting Palestinians that have to many children or just removing children all together. They just need to find the right moment to make their move. israel has been at this for a long time; if they haven' found a way to do so by now, they aren' tgoing to. They just need more time to make us comfortable with the idea. That it's best Palestinians children to not live there. the reason they don' tdo it has nothin to do with us; and everything to do with themselves. from an objective standpoint, it would be best if palestinians would stop having so many children, but that's clearly not going to happen. i'll just mark you down as a hater for the other side, since tha'ts how you're actin and what you are. zlefin, the only reason they have driven all the Palestinians out is because they know it would cost them US support and a lot of the support from the West. We are the only reason they don't push harder. I disagree, and would say you're quite clearly wrong. you're just a hater really. and your hate is blinding yuo to the more complex reailty of the situation. Not at all. I’ve followed it for most of my adult life and seen Israel’s politics shift and what people have run on. And those people keep getting elected and their party is in power. Peace hasn’t been on the table for a long time now. ok, so you're just bein gdumb then. just because peace isn't on the table (which is also false, peace IS on the table, it's just that there aren't mutually agreeable terms for such a peace), doesn't mean that all means of killing are acceptable. Honestly zlefin you can see where I'm coming from in this situation but the story is one of inevitable destruction for Palestinians. The problem is that no-one can bring themselves to call this what it is. A slow burning humanitarian crisis, caused by Western interests, that we have a duty to solve in the most compassionate way possible. Simply putting all of our weight behind Israel is the opposite of what we should be doing. If anything its an impossible conundrum because I'm sure most Palestinians would rather die in their homeland than be forced to relocate with no plan, and with Hamas controlling the destiny of such a large number of them they will never relocate anyway. The absolute worst thing we can do is simply write the Palestinians off as terrorists and try to help Israel slowly exterminate them, but no-one is proposing anything better. Its just fucking horrible.
I do see where you're coming from.
I built a plan for the peace myself; which would have a chance at working if implemented, but I'm certain there isn't enough political will in the US to stick to it. and trump makes that impossible anyways as he proves america may randomly abandon allies.
and of course I have no power to implement it myself, and never will.
though I don't see the palestinians getting destroyed, so much as marginalized.
|
On December 19 2017 07:46 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:35 Ryzel wrote:On December 19 2017 07:21 xDaunt wrote:On December 19 2017 07:13 Ryzel wrote:
xDaunt when you say self-interest of the nation, are you referring to what is objectively best for the nation? Or rather what is in the collective, subjective interest of the citizens of the nation? That depends upon the form of government. Right, that's what I thought. So, given the following premises (which you can feel free to rebutt)... 1. The rational US nation's self-interest is defined by the subjective whims of elected officials. 2. At least some of these elected officials are influenced by the principles of ethics and morality. Ergo, it is rational for the US, and other nations with the same form of government, to have their self-interest at least partially defined by ethics and morality? Your argument doesn't really follow from the premises that you have set forth. Here's what you should be arguing: "the nation should act morally and ethically because it is in the self-interest of the nation to do so." Now, while I'll stipulate that it may sometimes be in the nation's self-interest to act morally and ethically, this coincidence does not rebut my ultimate point acting morally and ethically still is not the ultimate end of the nation's foreign policy. Self-interest ultimately is, which is why there is no shortage of instances where nations do things that aren't moral or ethical.
Fair enough, I agree with your follow-up point. Thank you for clarifying my post and interpreting it in good faith!
|
On December 19 2017 07:51 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:48 Logo wrote:I see the job creation has already started! Hurrah! https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/
Since the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on December 2, 29 companies have announced $70.2 billion in stock buybacks, a maneuver that uses company cash to buy its own shares, which then drives up the price of those shares, rewarding major investors and executives whose compensation is directly tied to the company’s stock price.
The figure comes from a new report by Senate Democrats, which relies on the public statements of company executives. Stock buybacks, meanwhile, had been declining. There were $120 billion in buybacks in the entire second quarter of 2017, among all companies. The new figure — $70.2 billion in just 10 days, from just 29 companies — suggests that a surge of buybacks is in the offing if the tax bill becomes official, representing a staggering transfer of wealth from taxpayers straight to the wealthy.
I see financial ignorance still hasn't stopped! Huzzah!
Thanks for the insightful and informative reply.
|
On December 19 2017 07:46 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +Video released by a small, Florida police department shows a 93-year-old woman being forcefully evicted from her home prior to being arrested after she refused to leave.
The nonagenarian was evicted after she fell allegedly behind on rent.
According to the Eustis Police Department (“EPD”), Juanita Fitzgerald was repeatedly asked to pack up her belongings and clear out of the Franklin House specialized living community but she refused to do so.
Deputies on the scene claim Fitzgerald said she wouldn’t leave unless carried out. So, that’s apparently what happened.
In the video, which is difficult to watch, Fitzgerald repeatedly screams as police manhandle her. She exclaims, visibly in pain:
Ow, God, you’re hurting me! Ow! Oww!
As the police attempted to remove Fitzgerald from the building, the elderly woman slid out of her mobility chair and onto the ground. The scene is chaotic as multiple officers attempt to constrain the woman.
It is presently unclear whether Fitzgerald was injured during the forced removal.
The arrest charge given to Fitzgerald was for trespassing. After being processed by the EPD, Fitzgerald was released and turned over to a caretaker. lawandcrime.com(Apparently this lady does have money and refused to pay. Also turned down assistance from a bevy of organizations) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/elderly-woman-handcuffed-jail-refuse-leave-care-home-93-year-old-juanita-fitzgerald-florida-lake-a8111736.html
I don't much like the police but it's pretty much impossible to deal with that situation. I watched the first half of the video and it honestly didn't look like they did much if anything wrong, she was flailing and moving in such a way that interacting with her safely was virtually impossible. She probably should have been more forcibly restrained from the get-go, I think.
|
On December 19 2017 07:58 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:46 Nevuk wrote:Video released by a small, Florida police department shows a 93-year-old woman being forcefully evicted from her home prior to being arrested after she refused to leave.
The nonagenarian was evicted after she fell allegedly behind on rent.
According to the Eustis Police Department (“EPD”), Juanita Fitzgerald was repeatedly asked to pack up her belongings and clear out of the Franklin House specialized living community but she refused to do so.
Deputies on the scene claim Fitzgerald said she wouldn’t leave unless carried out. So, that’s apparently what happened.
In the video, which is difficult to watch, Fitzgerald repeatedly screams as police manhandle her. She exclaims, visibly in pain:
Ow, God, you’re hurting me! Ow! Oww!
As the police attempted to remove Fitzgerald from the building, the elderly woman slid out of her mobility chair and onto the ground. The scene is chaotic as multiple officers attempt to constrain the woman.
It is presently unclear whether Fitzgerald was injured during the forced removal.
The arrest charge given to Fitzgerald was for trespassing. After being processed by the EPD, Fitzgerald was released and turned over to a caretaker. lawandcrime.com(Apparently this lady does have money and refused to pay. Also turned down assistance from a bevy of organizations) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/elderly-woman-handcuffed-jail-refuse-leave-care-home-93-year-old-juanita-fitzgerald-florida-lake-a8111736.html I don't much like the police but it's pretty much impossible to deal with that situation. I watched the first half of the video and it honestly didn't look like they did much wrong, she was flailing and moving in such a way that interacting with her safely was virtually impossible.
I don't see what the issue is. Granny was breaking the law, so her ass needed to be evicted.
|
On December 19 2017 07:53 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:44 Jockmcplop wrote:
xDaunt do you think the US gains more in this case than it loses by taking unilateral action directly against the will of the international community, and why?
Does the will of the international community mean anything at all this case in your opinion? Yes, I do. This kind of action, even if it is mostly symbolic, will empower Israel and strengthen its position in the Middle East, which is good for America. In contrast, I do not see any cost to the action. The international community may bitch publicly, but nothing will come of it. There could be an uptick in terrorism, but I doubt that it will be particularly meaningful and anyone who is prone to becoming radicalized over something like this needs to be killed anyway, so let's just get it over with.
I can see your point, referring back to your point about morality and foreign policy pretty much explains it. I might come off sounding like a total hippy here (I am one) but in my personal opinion if you leave morality out of foreign policy in favour of self interest then you don't have grounds to refer to morality in any other circumstance.
If you spread evil around the world don't be surprised when evil turns up on your front door (you being America not you personally).
The world is a much, much worse place for this kind of thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
