Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

I would wager that most or all have. Obtaining contraception can be difficult for some people for various reasons. I know that the failures are relatively low. The assumption that pro-lifers make is that the low lifes are just out there screwing with no regard for consequences. I don't adhere to that, but I could be wrong.

woodguru

You missed the part where the conservatives say the constitution doesn't say anything so it's up to states.

Liberty Tree

Poor attempt at diversion.

Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

This should be considered as part of the total equation, whether you want it to or not. Get rid of a******ns, have more kids (mostly the lower income brackets), don't bother to fund programs for the low income to help support them, hell - let's stop contraception availability and cut off sex ed in schools, increase the burden on society by keeping them poor and pat yourself on the back for helping stop a******ns. Not a good trade in my mind.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

What you are ranting about is what none, who would like to see a******n go away want. Proper Education is the most important thing we could do for the next generations to prepare them for life and responsibility. Typical progressive r****t statement; as if the lower income brackets don't know how to have safe sex. Your reasoning, economics for ending the lives of future generations is d********g. We've had a******n for years. Seen the poverty rates go down?

Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

Sorry you mistook my comments as a rant. If I ever rant, you will know it.

I agree that a proper education is fundamental groundwork to improve status. Since that's the case, the public education system needs to be appropriately funded, since most people cannot afford a private one. There has been a systematic funding shortfall sponsored mostly by Republican administrations. I believe that will be exacerbated with the recent SCOTUS ruling from the Maine suit.

Poverty rates - let's see. Cost of living has been outstripping wages for decades. Middle class has shrunk and we are almost to a 2 tier economy. The haves and the have nots. The owners control almost everything that can be used as a means of wage improvement for the others. Utilizing Reaganomics, the owners will "trickle" the organizational wealth to the workers. How has that been working out? I have seen nothing to suggest that has worked well for anyone but the corporate world. They even used C***D money to buy back stocks rather than pass it on.

I choose to be supportive of the children that are alive rather than bring an unwanted child into this world. I choose the children that are alive over guns. I choose some form of Universal Health over the profits of big Pharma and insurance companies. I choose many things over what the current trend seems to be.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

I couldn't resist baiting you with education because I knew in typical progressive fashion your answer would be, throw more money at it. Students in the United States fare considerably worse than many of their counterparts across the globe in terms of knowledge gained from education. According to data from the Programme for International Student Assessment, 15-year-olds in the U.S. ranked 31st on OECD standardized mathematics tests, and their test scores were far below average in reading and science. Looks like the students aren't being taught the subjects they will need. Actually under Trumps policies real wage growth was above inflation. That's a fact so don't bother trying to twist it. The main reason the Middle Class has shrunk is taxes, regulations, and manufacturing being shipped to foreign workforces. They used C***d money to enrich the teachers unions, and shore up poorly run pension systems in some states. Supply side economics worked. I choose life. Maybe that child you are so thrilled to have aborted would have been the next great mind to solve affordable energy production. I am against stock buy backs under most circumstances. Guarantee it's more complicated then you understand.

Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

Regarding education - what are your proposed solutions. Republican controlled states have systematically attempted reduced funding to public schools. Why? Our education system is in trouble.
Wages - under Trump there was a period of time (I believe about 18 months) where wages exceeded inflation. That has not been typical since the 80's.
Middle Class - taxes are an issue, primarily because of the tax laws. IRS has decided not to pursue many wealthy tax avoided because they can afford the lawyers to fight back. Regular people really have few options. It’s even worse with corporations. Regulations typically are released after a public commentary period. They generally are there for a reason (pollution, worker safety, wages, saving wetlands, etc). Corporations have used these as an excuse to move production to a place without those rules. Did the regs cause this - possibly. Sounds like it's a result of the bottom line mentality, which does not factor in social or environmental costs.
C***d money - I found little that supported your assertion. I found many cases of the money being used to upgrade facilities, improve educational materials, give raises (is this what you mean?), modernize equipment.
Supply side works for everyone but the worker. Investors, corporate execs, almost everyone but the worker. Isn’t it interesting that the wage gap as compared to inflation really started in earnest about that time?
Life - it's possible that something like you suggested could occur. We will never know. Does that outweigh the needs of the living? I don't agree. I am personally against a******n, but am a believer in choice and am not "thrilled" as you state.
Stock buybacks - I doubt it is more complicated than you think I can understand. I have a Masters in Economics and worked for corporations for over 30 years in contracts, finance, government compliance and program management. When given the opportunity to either support their workers or support their own cash flow, most companies chose the latter. In fact, there were companies that took the money, intended to save jobs, and still laid off.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

https://teaching-certification.com/teaching/education-spending-by-state/ Republicans would like D.C. and Federal dollars out of education. So would I. That's not true at all about the IRS. Where do you people get these idea. The well to do pay the majority of Federal taxes. I don't like the progressive tax system and believe we need a fair/flat tax. No society has ever taxed its way to prosperity. Ah, typical progressive, never saw a tax or regulation you didn't like. Try running your own business some time. Masters in economics? Right. I do believe you've worked for the government. You sound like a government drone. If you don't support your good workers your cash flow will suffer. Typical government employee. Remember, companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders by law. Told you it was more complicated than you think.
I'm done I think you are rumitiod or his inbred brother/sister. Same circular arguments with no real foundation.

Elrond51 Loc: New Mexico

I was never a government employee, not sure how you missed that. Companies do not treat their employees well. They continue to give crappy raises, reduce benefits and threaten workers with repercussions for attempts to organize. All in the name of fiduciary responsibity to the shareholders. Freidman really screwed the pooch with that theory..
You can be done cause I am done with you.