what do you mean by education? Are you using it in the context of the conversation (public sex ed?) or in a broader sense?
if the former, ignore me; if not I think it needs clarifying, or at least acknowledging the ways one can receive education or get educated…
That makes no sense.
So education should end at adulthood and adults should not rely on anyone else for information? Oh wait, this information that is to be sought; where and who does it come from? Someone else I suppose. Does a teacher count?
Why default to tribalism?
Not to mention the religiosity of the people of those states. A bare ass or a nipple is shown on TV and they’re the first ones on the phone to the FCC (yet grotesque violence is a-okay). Sex is taboo subject and not discussed. Couple abstinence-only sex ed with parents who are too ashamed to discuss it with their kids and that’s a recipe for teen pregnancy.
I’m speaking generally, that is, one is taught how to be responsible. The idea that teaching people how to be responsible is somehow making them not have a sense of responsibility makes no sense to me. It was in response to BG saying, “Nobody is responsible for their actions.”
When I was a kid I had the idea, or dream might be more accurate, that all southern women dressed and looked like Daisy Duke.
I didn’t say this but it doesn’t make your argument stronger.
I didn’t say this either. I merely pointed out that adding 2.5 million kids in three years from pregnancies that are unwanted is going to come at a societal cost. These kids will need food, clothes, health care, etc. I completely agree this should come from the parents and not the government. So what happens when it can’t? That’s the nature of government programs. I can completely get on board with reforms in that area and I know their are abuses. You’re still going to have a large amount of these children you’re forcing into existence need societal (government) care.
Be really, really thankful that they don’t. Southern women are super sweet. All the waitresses call you “honey”. But many of them are huge.
Seriously I’m out of this one. I’ll just keep paying my taxes and funding all those dead Democrat babies. Oh excuse me, Products Of Conception or as we’ve come to define them non-person humans.
I’ll do the same and keep funding the Republican states since they have the highest rates of teenage pregnancy, government dependency, food stamps, etc. And funding those damn Democrats as well. I would certainly like a lower tax burden but at the same time I’m not comfortable with kids and people going hungry or not having access to health care. Not when we can fund Obama and Trump golf trips, visiting Mar Lago, etc. Not when we can request billions more on defense when we already spend more than everyone else by far. Not when we can bail out businesses from potentially going under.
You’re a good poster but letting your emotion get the best of your arguments on this topic my man.
The bills, as they stand, contain countless incentives for gamesmanship: differing tax rates for different types of foreign property and profits, arbitrary expiration and implementation dates to hold the 10-year deficit impact below $1.5 trillion, and changes to the Affordable Care Act to free up government dollars that could roil private insurance markets. “There are more ticking time bombs in this bill than a Road Runner cartoon,” says Martin Sullivan, chief economist for the nonprofit group Tax Analysts.
Two components in particular could have significant, unintended consequences: the treatment of pass-throughs—businesses such as partnerships that pay taxes as individuals rather than corporations—and of state and local taxes.
Historically, pass-throughs paid the same rate as individuals. Small businesses often say this is unfair because the top individual rate, now 39.6%, is above the corporate tax rate, now 35%.
Those complaints have little economic foundation: 86% of pass-throughs are so small they pay a personal rate of 25% or less, according to the Tax Policy Center, a think tank. Moreover, pass-through income is taxed once whereas corporate income is commonly taxed twice: at the corporate level, then on dividends and capital gains to shareholders.
So with this shitty bill heading towards passage, a child molester getting elected to the Senate, and the death of Net Neutrality, December is going to suck.
The Joint Committe on Taxation has also scored the tax bill under the (nonsensical) dynamic scoring metric…
…and, yep, JCT joins all the other analyses using dynamic scoring showing that the plan still produces over $1 trillion in costs. Again, this is if you assume the Magic Bean Growth of Tax Cuts - still a $1 trillion hole.
Taking bets on how long after they pass it the GOP starts complaining about the deficit and carving up SS, Medicare & Medicaid. Because you know that’s coming.
That needs to happen regardless of party. Entitlements can only get kicked down the road so far before they will need to be addressed.
I wish.
They do need to be addressed, but not this way. It’s only going to further screw the middle class and poor.
I saw another company do this earlier. Some early consensus is with “creative booking” it would be possible to completely control the number that appears to be.
Although part of me can’t wait to see their stock price soar from this
You mean to tell me it’s not going to…I don’t know…“trickle down” to the peons?
as opposed to what? Literally the entire country/world? Shit’s gonna come to a head magnificently if people keep avoiding this for the sake of some potential (real or perceived - the magnitude of which is less than certain by any stretch of the imagination) calamity or discomforts to one group or another.
The amazing thing I’ve noticed is that people adjust and move forward. At some point people ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS. At this point it can be limited to a smaller proportion than if it’s kicked down the road a bit. Also, keep this in mind, if it was addressed 20 years ago the proportion of belt tightening and adjusting would have been less than if it’s addressed today.
So, I have to ask, since you think it ought not be addressed “this way” then what way? Do you have a proposition, some alternative? Honestly would love to hear it (not being a dick, any suggestion or thought other than “not addressed this way” would be helpful to the conversation - because what you’re saying right now, it’s not helpful and it’s what people say when they don’t want to make hard but necessary choices).