Billionaires see fortunes rise by 27% during the pandemic

originally posted by: neutronflux
And how would the time line through the courts be legally changed?

Are you going to ask the same questions over and over that I already answered? If they start sooner they can be heard sooner.

This isn't rocket science.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
And how would the time line through the courts be legally changed?

Are you going to ask the same questions over and over that I already answered? If they start sooner they can be heard sooner.

This isn't rocket science.

I seen innuendo with no actual answer in reality that doesn’t require more government. Anti government person. Seems your for a strong federal government with no state rights.

a reply to: neutronflux

Answered already on the last page, not my fault if it doesn't register. Maybe read things completely before making 5 posts in reply.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: neutronflux

Answered already on the last page, not my fault if it doesn't register. Maybe read things completely before making 5 posts in reply.

So you back to no actual facts, no actual court history to cite, and no actual past legal decisions to back your claim.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How is voting for the lesser of two evils compromising your ideals?

I mean, if I love my ideals and my choices are:
A) vote for the guy who will slowly restore some of my ideals, while ignoring many
B) vote for the guy who will quickly destroy most of my ideals
C) vote for some other guy which shares my ideals but has no shot, which will likely help B get elected

It seems like a pretty simple choice.

I used to be like you, sticking fully to my desired political principles, unwilling to compromise. It got me nowhere. My ideals were simply being destroyed quickly and I was helping them by default.

Have you ever seen the movie SLC Punk?

originally posted by: neutronflux
So you back to no actual facts...

I's a fact that the Federal government did nothing on day one, prove me wrong Mr. Big Government Lover.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
How is voting for the lesser of two evils compromising your ideals?

Because neither candidate or neither party is a 'lesser two evils' they are two sides of the same coin.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I feel you there. As reagan said:

"What's the difference between a democrat and a republican?"
"It takes a republican a few days longer to become a communist."

Trump is the only one that has been different from the others.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Trump is the only one that has been different from the others.

Said the trillions in spending he signed off on.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Power of the purse lies with the congress. He can only sign what they send him. He submits a budget with cuts, they ignore it and send him one with increases. Two sides of the same coin, like you said.

No new wars though. Troops coming home. Rip roaring economy until covid. Deregulation out the wazoo. Things we don't get with establishment presidents.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
So you back to no actual facts...

I's a fact that the Federal government did nothing on day one, prove me wrong Mr. Big Government Lover.

What was there to do. You haven’t provided any proof states invoked unconstitutional emergency powers the first 28 to 30 days of each states lockdown.

Now answer:

The DOJ has involvement in being against extended lockdowns that abuse emergency powers.

Is that a false statement

Lockdowns that targeted specific people’s had injections injected at the state level and did not require DOJ action. Is that a false statement.

Please cite and quote where I love and or want big government Mr libertarian that wants a federal government to rule on state rights.


So your back to posting lies.

Going by what I see out in the real world and what i read here the US has been going a long time .
I will say one thing no matter what you call a system every last one is based on controlling people as they must be freedom is and always has been a illusion .

You really want to be free go to the Alaska wilderness of way out in the Bush in Canada .
As if there is such anything as democory or any one really ahs a choice by voting who THEY want and Tell you to vote for .

Voting miens little when every one is picked BY local state federal government to run .

a reply to: dug88

Some suspect that the topic of a pandemic has been discussed for many years at Davos.

originally posted by: neutronflux
What was there to do. You haven’t provided any proof states invoked unconstitutional emergency powers the first 28 to 30 days of each states lockdown.

Is there something wrong with you that you aren't reading and comprehending what I write? I said, probably about 20 times already, that it was my OPINION that any law that elevated one citizen and/or business over another by deeming one 'essential' and the other 'non-essential' was un-Constitutional.

You want 'proof' of my OPINIONS? Go read my posts again.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
What was there to do. You haven’t provided any proof states invoked unconstitutional emergency powers the first 28 to 30 days of each states lockdown.

Is there something wrong with you that you aren't reading and comprehending what I write? I said, probably about 20 times already, that it was my OPINION that any law that elevated one citizen and/or business over another by deeming one 'essential' and the other 'non-essential' was un-Constitutional.

You want 'proof' of my OPINIONS? Go read my posts again.

You opinion is not the historical body of evidence that for decades the current emergency measures granted by states have repeatedly been found constitutional by the court system.

You opinion that the Trump administration could do something day one regarding a constitutional energy powers shutdown regarded as constitutional by literal decades of challenges through the court system is a false opinion with no established fact found in pass court rules.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You argument is total ignorant on established law

Two centuries of law guide legal approach to modern pandemic

www.americanbar.org...

Under the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions over nearly 200 years, state governments have the primary authority to control the spread of dangerous diseases within their jurisdictions. The 10th Amendment, which gives states all powers not specifically given to the federal government, allows them the authority to take public health emergency actions, such as setting quarantines and business restrictions.

So yes. There is literally nothing legal the Trump administration could do in the face of established law concerning states first 28 - to thirty days of emergency powers.

Your argument that the Trump administration could legally do something meaningful day one of a state’s lockdown is baseless and full of BS.

Im going to be real frank here: either we do something about the growing wealth disparity in this country, or we will have our children and grandchildren over throw the government and replace the economic system with anything but capitalism.

Im all for free markets, etc. But the free market cannot be allowed to threaten the union itself.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Something for you to consider, read the above. The chart, in particular, should give you some extreme pause for thought.

Its one thing to understand that older people will have amassed more wealth. But look at the Gen X and Millenial numbers. We are literally drowning. As someone who had COVID knock out almost 20k of annual income, I can relate to the angst for sure.

Be warned: continue ignoring what Millenials and Gen Z is saying to the peril of us all.

a reply to: neutronflux

Everything you've said in rebuttal is 100% in support of big government overreach. You cannot even bring yourself to say one disparaging thing about how it was handled, you opinion of me means nothing, I can sleep at night.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: neutronflux

Everything you've said in rebuttal is 100% in support of big government overreach. You cannot even bring yourself to say one disparaging thing about how it was handled, you opinion of me means nothing, I can sleep at night.

I didn’t say its right or wrong.

Is this statement false.

So yes. There is literally nothing legal the Trump administration could do in the face of established law concerning states first 28 - to thirty days of emergency powers.

originally posted by: neutronflux
I didn’t say its right or wrong.

Exactly, you didn't say it was wrong, therefore you think it was appropriate.

If you felt otherwise you would have said so in one of your pathological multi-post replies.