Fringe conspiracy containment thread
This is a huge goalpost shift. I was questioning your statement that "while in power, Dems killed family leave."
Manchin isn't a Democrat?
But it fell out of his compromise framework, a victim of centrists who objected to its ambition and cost.
nty is so funny. People to the right of 80% of the population on an issue are centrists.
These articles are always written as if lobbyists, campaign contributions, speaking fees, fake jobs, etc don't exist. All of this is decided by people sitting around and debating the issues from principled positions.
No. I'm just aware that he is no longer a member of the Democratic party.
exactly, but have you considered it was because he was killed and replaced?
Spoiler
He hasn't been much of a Democrat for the last twenty years, and now, as everyone knows, he isn't even nominally a Democrat.
Yeah. When you read that article it seems almost impossible that the policy didn't get through. Even some Republican politicians support it. Trump supports it and put it to congress while prez. How could even a right leaning Dem (at the time) oppose it? Seems crazy.
Set over set. Again! Well, i guess I'll rebuy.
I searched to be sure. The word "lobbyist" or any variation never appears in the artcle. No mention of donors or campaign contributions.
It was all just a high school style debate over sincere beliefs.
plenty of ways
the rich dont need as much as the poor so we discriminate against them and give an equitable amount to everyone, equitable as in its an amount they need or deserve etc.
the rich dont need the same as the poor and they certainly dont deserve more
plenty of ways
the rich dont need as much as the poor so we discriminate against them and give an equitable amount to everyone, equitable as in its an amount they need or deserve etc.
the rich dont need the same as the poor and they certainly dont deserve more
What does that have to do with parental leave?
sorry, I see. Its because as a nation, we need people to have children and having kids is an incredibly important part of life. Those people are doing much more than citizens who do not have kids.
The government already subsidizes children with tax benefits. And we certainly don't need more children in the US when we have people dying to move here every day.
I set em up...
You are taking this hyper literally, which is why almost everyone disagrees.
Pw is right. Essentially every policy is discriminatory in some way. You favor vacations. "Discriminatory" against retirees, houswives and husbands, etc. Oh well. It is equitable and good.
Moreover, you would eventually benefit from living in a more stable society. Better developed people. Less divorce, welfare, crime, mental illness, etc.
After we all croak, it would be as close to a non discriminatory policy as possible as all children would benefit and everyone starts off as a child.
That's ridiculous. There's no reason the government should be subsidizing the creation of new people at all. The US is in no danger of becoming depopulated; as I said previously, people are literally dying for a chance to move here.
The only reason I can fathom for a disinterested person to support current Americans having more babies, instead of letting more people immigrate would be racism.
But really the main reason it is supported by most people is that most adults are parents, and they just selfishly want money to be taken from other people and given to them.
