I find it increasingly difficult to believe there will be a spring sports season AT ALL this year.

This is only going to exacerbate the difference between the haves and have nots.

We are in for a rough transition that will have a ripple effect for years.
I agree completely and not just in the realm of schools. When the governor told a dog groomer they could not be one-on-one trimming a pet during the shutdown but gun shops were essential to everyday life, we see the divides right in front of our faces. This will only get worse when many will not be able to pay May, June, July rents, some back to work and some not, any too scared to return to work will be booted from unemployment. These and most other examples targets poor, intended or not. It goes deeper and deeper. Your point about schools seems very accurate and in line with the push to privatize anything and everything if possible.

Like you I see this will have an impact in many areas including schools for years.
 

Running Man 101

Active member
This is only going to exacerbate the difference between the haves and have nots. Some school districts currently get very little state aid, so reductions in that aid might end up with only modest impacts on the overall budget. Poorer districts have a large part of their budget dependent on state aid and will suffer to a much greater degree.

I've seen some people argue in other forums that we can reduce costs by reducing the number of teachers and doing more classes online. The problem is that there is no evidence what we're doing online is effective. From what I have discerned talking to teachers in other districts, my school district is holding students to relatively lofty expectations and we're only covering about 25% of the material we would have normally covered 4th quarter. There is also no way to get an accurate assessment of learning, since we have no practical way of knowing who's actually taking any assessment - older siblings, parents, etc.

Several years ago, I believe there was a Stanford study of online eduction that showed in a 180-day school year, high school students lost 150 days of progress in English and 180 days of progress in Math. So much of education is affected by teacher-student relationships. Starting the school year online is going to make it much tougher to develop those relationships. In situations where access to technology is inconsistent, it's going to be brutal. Among the brightest students, who are already capable life-long learners by the time they are in high school online classes might be sufficient to keep them moving forward, but that will not be true for the majority of students.

It's difficult to remain optimistic at this point.

Education of our children has never been easy, but our structures and our staffs are not prepared for an online education paradigm. We are in for a rough transition that will have a ripple effect for years.
Have never understood on-line classes. There is so much more to teaching and learning than just displaying information. I'm sure some small fraction of kids do well with it, maybe if they already understand everything.

There are some fundamental changes that need to take place with our public educational system, but on-line courses are not one of them.

Just guessing, but how much of the total school budgets were transportation related, fuel specifically, that may explain the $300M? Total annual school budget for OH is $32.4B. Less than 1% cut. Couldn't easily find the part that is transportation. For our school district it is roughly 12% (large area). So say it is 10% for the state $3.2M so $0.3B was cut or 10%. That is easily fuel savings on money that wasn't spent. Sounds reasonable to me. When you run an organization, you don't get to save money unspent money from fiscal years.
 

Running Man 101

Active member
I agree completely and not just in the realm of schools. When the governor told a dog groomer they could not be one-on-one trimming a pet during the shutdown but gun shops were essential to everyday life, we see the divides right in front of our faces. This will only get worse when many will not be able to pay May, June, July rents, some back to work and some not, any too scared to return to work will be booted from unemployment. These and most other examples targets poor, intended or not. It goes deeper and deeper. Your point about schools seems very accurate and in line with the push to privatize anything and everything if possible.

Like you I see this will have an impact in many areas including schools for years.
Well, there are some fundamental issues at play here that are not trivial. I think one reason that you are seeing states open is that they were unconstitutional to begin with and it was starting to play out. The "public good" cause is nice, but it is secondary to your individual constitutional rights. The 2nd amendment is actually written in the constitutional, "shall not be infringed". Noticed the abortion clinics managed to stay open. Show me where that is in the constitution.

The issue is when the government picks and chooses "who" can be open. They are liable. Notice how the federal government didn't shut things down, it was the states?
 
If you want to think they are strictly following the constitution and guns are essential, not the $ cow for those making the decisions, be very careful of who and what you are following. If I have an uninfringed 2nd amendment right I should get my tank out of the garage to clear the streets on the way to track practice. Decisions of what was open and closed during the pandemic were politically advertised as what was essential and what was not. Many mom & pop specialty stores were forced to close with many that will not reopen while the Walmarts of the world sucked their business. A local paint store was not allowed to open but Walmart in the neighboring town sold out of some colors. Abortion is also a constitutional right per Roe v Wade and could have major medical implications. Not sure how guns are essential. As Madman said, the fall out from all this could last not days or weeks but years and touch many areas of our daily lives. The divide of haves and have nots could grow much larger than the chasm they already are.
 

yj_runfan

Well-known member
If you want to think they are strictly following the constitution and guns are essential, not the $ cow for those making the decisions, be very careful of who and what you are following. If I have an uninfringed 2nd amendment right I should get my tank out of the garage to clear the streets on the way to track practice. Decisions of what was open and closed during the pandemic were politically advertised as what was essential and what was not. Many mom & pop specialty stores were forced to close with many that will not reopen while the Walmarts of the world sucked their business. A local paint store was not allowed to open but Walmart in the neighboring town sold out of some colors. Abortion is also a constitutional right per Roe v Wade and could have major medical implications. Not sure how guns are essential. As Madman said, the fall out from all this could last not days or weeks but years and touch many areas of our daily lives. The divide of haves and have nots could grow much larger than the chasm they already are.
When you see how the slightest disruption in peoples' daily routine causes panic buying it wouldn't be hard to imagine things turning violent if something major happened. That's why personal protection devices need to be available in times like this. I read that most of the people buying guns during the shut down were first time gun buyers. I think they really believed the need for protection could be a real possibility. I'm sure people that hate guns will think this is a fantasy. Another one of the growing casms of our society.
 

Running Man 101

Active member
There are no vaccines for SARS related viruses to date--so waiting on one is not certain. They just mutate out or enough people catch it and it stops propogating (R<1).
If you want to think they are strictly following the constitution and guns are essential, not the $ cow for those making the decisions, be very careful of who and what you are following. If I have an uninfringed 2nd amendment right I should get my tank out of the garage to clear the streets on the way to track practice. Decisions of what was open and closed during the pandemic were politically advertised as what was essential and what was not. Many mom & pop specialty stores were forced to close with many that will not reopen while the Walmarts of the world sucked their business. A local paint store was not allowed to open but Walmart in the neighboring town sold out of some colors. Abortion is also a constitutional right per Roe v Wade and could have major medical implications. Not sure how guns are essential. As Madman said, the fall out from all this could last not days or weeks but years and touch many areas of our daily lives. The divide of haves and have nots could grow much larger than the chasm they already are.
Abortion is not a constitutional right. By definition it deprives one person of life past a certain point. It can and should be overturned.

I agree with everything else you said about businesses. You basically completely supported what I said. Since they did pick and chose, they (meaning WE) will be left to pick up the tab.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Go back and study history. There were many regulations put on owning arms/guns. There were laws you had to follow. They had to be registered. you couldn't be armed in populated areas. You could not conceal carry. You had to retreat until there was no more retreating. Your home was the only exception. Guns could not be stored or carried loaded. Especially in the home. The right to bear arms was conditional on swearing a loyalty oath to the government. You were disarmed if you did not. Oh, and you had to be white. There can be limits put on rights. More people are killed with guns than are saved from being killed by the use of a gun. Let's take out the 60% of people that die by suicide each year. They have that right, I guess. 35% of the rest of gun deaths are homicide. That leaves 2% are law enforcement or some civilian shooting and killing someone. and 2% accidental shootings. I guess all of that equals a "well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state." How fast do you think the government would come down on me if I had a working anti aircraft gun or nuke that I could launch?

So now, let's get into when life starts and should my wife be condemned to die if her pregnancy is life threatening or should my daughter have to carry a baby of someone that raped her. Again, there just might be a happy medium here. How about we try and get Catholics to use birth control since they account for about 1/3 of all abortions in the USA? Baby steps.

We really went to gun control and abortion? Sweet.
 
Last edited:

grange45

Active member
yj, yes I see gun purchases as panic, another divide.

RunningMan, What is to overturn if it is not a right? Maybe I should nuke the clinics since arms are in my constitutional right.
Just ignore him (and report him). I am now (just look at his past posts). When did abortion needed to be talked about in track and field forum?
 
Last edited:

Running Man 101

Active member
yj, yes I see gun purchases as panic, another divide.

RunningMan, What is to overturn if it is not a right? Maybe I should nuke the clinics since arms are in my constitutional right.
If you were to nuke the clinics, then you are killing people and destroying property. The reason you cannot have a nuke is that it is not needed for you to protect you and your property. BTW, very, very few people object to pregnancies ending as a result of a medical emergency. The objection is being used as a means for birth control.

The fundamental right to abortion protected by the US constitution was completely made up out of thin air. It has no basis to anything in the constitution, which is why it is state issue. It was the final solution of the communists, margaret sanger and the eugenics programs, all of which by their very nature are racists. People get worried about Roe v Wade ending abortion. It will not, in some areas it will be much easier and others not. You can always move to where it is okay.
 

grange45

Active member
Dewine's red blood is coming out right now. I really can't fathom him doing this right now to education and students (it's teacher appreciation week for god's sake). And he admitted that he has billions in the rainy day fund just sitting there but won't use them. I have just lost all trust in him. He's going to cut more. P2P is going to rise per district along with cuts of staff that's going to affect students mostly.

I said it before: he's school choice and privatization. I wouldn't be surprised if he gives private schools a bailout with the rainy day funds.
 
Last edited:

Running Man 101

Active member
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Go back and study history. There were many regulations put on owning arms/guns. There were laws you had to follow. They had to be registered. you couldn't be armed in populated areas. You could not conceal carry. You had to retreat until there was no more retreating. Your home was the only exception. Guns could not be stored or carried loaded. Especially in the home. The right to bear arms was conditional on swearing a loyalty oath to the government. You were disarmed if you did not. Oh, and you had to be white. There can be limits put on rights. More people are killed with guns than are saved from being killed by the use of a gun. Let's take out the 60% of people that die by suicide each year. They have that right, I guess. 35% of the rest of gun deaths are homicide. That leaves 2% are law enforcement or some civilian shooting and killing someone. and 2% accidental shootings. I guess all of that equals a "well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state." How fast do you think the government would come down on me if I had a working anti aircraft gun or nuke that I could launch?

So now, let's get into when life starts and should my wife be condemned to die if her pregnancy is life threatening or should my daughter have to carry a baby of someone that raped her. Again, there just might be a happy medium here. How about we try and get Catholics to use birth control since they account for about 1/3 of all abortions in the USA? Baby steps.

We really went to gun control and abortion? Sweet.
psycho dad,

Most of what you write usually is correct. You have cherry picked information in a few Northern States long ago (laws found to be unconstitutional). The purpose and intent of the 2nd amendment is crystal clear. You can read about it here for a good synopsis. Reasonable people can discus the limits on weapons, but the right to have one to protect yourself and your property is not. If there was a real gun violence issue in the country, you'd know it. You do know that more people die from failing out of bed in a given year than die from AR platforms. More than 90% of the deaths (of your 35%) are related to drugs--knowing this drugs should be illegal, but people still have them. The most unpublished stat in the US is how many crimes DON'T happen because people have them.
 

Mr. Slippery

Well-known member
Dewine's red blood is coming out right now. I really can't fathom him doing this right now to education and students (it's teacher appreciation week for god's sake). And he admitted that he has billions in the rainy day fund just sitting there but won't use them.

I said it before: he's school choice and privatization.
By Federal law, DeWine and any other governor has to have a balanced state budget at the end of each fiscal year (June 30). However, Ohio does its budget in 2-year increments. As for the rainy day fund, just wait. He's gonna need it for next year and as he has already stated, he expects to need it for the year after that. We went from a projected $200 million budget surplus to a $776 million budget shortfall in roughly 2 months. Next year is going to be very rough unless a miraculous economic recovery occurs. That rainy day fund will not plug all the holes. It will only prevent the state from having to make more abrupt cuts to balance next year's budget.

I've done budgeting on a microscopic scale (college fraternity), but if my revenues (mostly dues) came in under what was projected, then I had to find places where I could make spending cuts (Often the social fund, so if you want us to have a party, pay your dues!). Certain portions of the budget couldn't be cut because the expenditures were mandatory no matter what my revenue stream looked like (semiannual dues and pledge fees that were owed to our international headquarters). Thankfully, my budgeting was done semiannually, and I was allowed to run a surplus, so when I made my 2nd budget, I intentionally set dues high for 2 reasons: 1) I wanted to get the guys' money from them in the fall before they spent it all prior to doing the 2nd semester budget and 2) We had a disproportionally large senior class, and the house by-law stated that all 2nd semester seniors' dues were 50%. I didn't think it was fair that the younger brothers should have to carry the financial load, so I got more out of the seniors in the fall to make things easier on my successor.
 
Last edited:

grange45

Active member
By Federal law, DeWine and any other governor has to have a balanced state budget at the end of each fiscal year (June 30). However, Ohio does its budget in 2-year increments. As for the rainy day fund, just wait. He's gonna need it for next year and as he has already stated, he expects to need it for the year after that. We went from a projected $200 million budget surplus to a $776 million budget shortfall in roughly 2 months. Next year is going to be very rough unless a miraculous economic recovery occurs. That rainy day fund will not plug all the holes. It will only prevent the state from having to make more abrupt cuts to balance next year's budget.

I've done budgeting on a much smaller scale, but if my revenues came in under what was projected, then I had to find places where I could make cuts. Certain portions of the budget could not be cut because the expenditures were mandatory no matter what my revenue stream looked like.
Agree but there was alot of other things he could of cut, but he went right for education and little bit towards medicare. He's probably going to cut more soon to other institutions.

Urbana is already gone. It's only a matter of time other d3 colleges go under as well. It annoys the hell out me that he was wearing a different Ohio college tie during his briefings each day over the past few weeks and then does this.
 

Mr. Slippery

Well-known member
Agree but there was alot of other things he could of cut, but he went right for education and little bit towards MedicAid. He's probably going to cut more soon to other institutions.

Urbana is already gone. It's only a matter of time other d3 colleges go under as well. It annoys the hell out me that he was wearing a different Ohio college tie during his briefings each day over the past few weeks and then does this.
1. It was Medicaid he cut, not Medicare. Medicaid is administered by the states.

2. Yes, there will likely be more cuts in next year's budget. The rainy day fund will keep some of the cuts from being less severe, but there will still be cuts.

3. It won't be just D3 colleges going under. Akron is eliminating 6 of its 11 academic colleges in order to offset its projected budget deficit. Akron was already having some financial problems. They spent a ton of money on new buildings and marketing within the past decade, and it hasn't generated the desired effect. Their on-campus football stadium has become more of an albatross around their neck than an asset. I saw an article in my local paper last week where Kent State could see as much as a $110 million budget deficit if school doesn't reopen in its normal fashion in the fall.

A few of the Ohio colleges in the poorest financial shape are D2: Malone, Notre Dame, Lake Erie, Ohio Dominican, plus Urbana whose financial woes have been public since at least 2014. Those schools are throwing small amounts of athletic money at large numbers of students in order to entice them to enroll and write them bigger tuition checks in return. It's a band-aid. Cincinnati Christian was doing the same thing when it closed its doors at the end of the fall semester. They were recruiting boys who run slower than 18:00 in XC for pete's sake! What would you have the governor do to support these smaller colleges I named? They're private.
 

yj_runfan

Well-known member
Are schools still paying bus drivers and janitors? I know that's a small percentage but I still wonder. It wouldn't surprise me. Their utility bills should be way down. They aren't buying toilet paper either.
 

grange45

Active member
1. It was Medicaid he cut, not Medicare. Medicaid is administered by the states.

2. Yes, there will likely be more cuts in next year's budget. The rainy day fund will keep some of the cuts from being less severe, but there will still be cuts.

3. It won't be just D3 colleges going under. Akron is eliminating 6 of its 11 academic colleges in order to offset its projected budget deficit. Akron was already having some financial problems. They spent a ton of money on new buildings and marketing within the past decade, and it hasn't generated the desired effect. Their on-campus football stadium has become more of an albatross around their neck than an asset. I saw an article in my local paper last week where Kent State could see as much as a $110 million budget deficit if school doesn't reopen in its normal fashion in the fall.

A few of the Ohio colleges in the poorest financial shape are D2: Malone, Notre Dame, Lake Erie, Ohio Dominican, plus Urbana whose financial woes have been public since at least 2014. Those schools are throwing small amounts of athletic money at large numbers of students in order to entice them to enroll and write them bigger tuition checks in return. It's a band-aid. Cincinnati Christian was doing the same thing when it closed its doors at the end of the fall semester. They were recruiting boys who run slower than 18:00 in XC for pete's sake! What would you have the governor do to support these smaller colleges I named? They're private.
I know and thanks for the correction about medicaid.

Again there could have been many other things he could of cut first before education like highway construction or even temporarily raising taxes on certain things like alcohol, cigarettes, and gas right now. That would generate and not take away from the institutions that need it the most and affect students and athletes. It always seems public services is what they go after to solve a problem (think Kasich and senate bill 5).

Is it irrational to think educational institutions or the OHSAA to get a bailout instead of businesses? It affects kids the most...but I guess they don't vote.
 

runohio

Member
Just sharing the following - gas tax was raised in Ohio last summer and with people driving a lot less now there will be a shortage of money for road projects.

Here are the current taxes in Ohio:

Ohio Cigarette and Tobacco Excise Taxes
Total Ohio Cigarette Taxes
$1.60 / pack
Federal Tax on Cigarette
$1.00 / pack

Ohio Gas Excise Tax: $0.38.5 / gallon
Federal Gas Tax $0.18.4/gallon

Federal Excise Alcohol Taxes
The U.S. government collects these alcohol taxes per gallon.
Alcohol taxes Beer…….$18.00
Wine…….$1.07 to $3.40 depending on alcohol content.
Spirits……$13.50

To beer Ohio adds an extra excise tax of 18 cents per gallon. For wine the added tax is 32 cents. But for wine with alcohol from over 14% to 21% alcohol, the tax jumps to $1.00. For vermouth, it’s $1.10. And for sparkling wine, it’s $1.50.

Wine, spirits, and beer are subject to sales taxes. The state rate is 5.75%. But local rates can be 2.25%. Thus, the tax can be as high as 8%.
 

mathking

Active member
NERD! That isn't fun at all. Fairly lengthy? I didn't get very far, I must admit. I tried skipping to the end, but that doesn't help. Trying to go through something like that with my dyslexic way of reading, is brutal. It made me sick.

I trust you to bottom line it for me. I'll take your word for it.
Essentially there are several takeaways. The first is what has been said before, but they make it really clear, the need is the get the infection rate r under 1. Then it is under control. Essentially they show that there are a lot of different ways to do that. Involving combinations of hygiene practices, social distancing, isolation and contact tracing, immunity... They do most of the simulations under an assumption that we will roughly triple our ICU capacity. (This is about what health economists think is realistic. But it won't happen overnight.)

The big points include that there is a complete false idea that "flattening the curve" means the same number of people get it over time. This was lost in translation when we started talking about flattening the curve but it is not the case. If you really flatten the curve fewer people will end up getting the disease overall. See the next point about overshoot.

Overshoot is why just trying to get "herd immunity" via infections as quickly as possible is problematic on several fronts. The main reason is that you over shoot the 60ish% of the population with immunity from infection that is needed for herd immunity. If you go the way of getting all the infections out of the way quickly you get 90%+/- of the population infected in a short time, so a lot more people die. If you get to herd immunity more slowly, you don't over shoot as much, and maybe 30-40% of the population never gets infected instead of only 10%. It is also problematic because of another big point...

... immunity, whether from surviving infections or from vaccines, is not likely to be permanent. Right now we don't even know for sure that you do get immunity if you survive it, but the working average is about a year, based on similar viruses. This could be off on either side, and will vary for individuals. But it is very likely that this will become seasonal. If we develop effective vaccines and/or treatments, then it will be something like the flu that is manageable. The interrelation of points two and three is that assuming immunity wears off (which is highly likely) if you go for getting to herd immunity quickly in terms of time, then you also compress the time when everyone is once again vulnerable. This leads to more spikes AND makes it harder to get back to r<1 via herd immunity because most of the population is vulnerable at the same time.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
Essentially there are several takeaways. The first is what has been said before, but they make it really clear, the need is the get the infection rate r under 1. Then it is under control. Essentially they show that there are a lot of different ways to do that. Involving combinations of hygiene practices, social distancing, isolation and contact tracing, immunity... They do most of the simulations under an assumption that we will roughly triple our ICU capacity. (This is about what health economists think is realistic. But it won't happen overnight.)

The big points include that there is a complete false idea that "flattening the curve" means the same number of people get it over time. This was lost in translation when we started talking about flattening the curve but it is not the case. If you really flatten the curve fewer people will end up getting the disease overall. See the next point about overshoot.

Overshoot is why just trying to get "herd immunity" via infections as quickly as possible is problematic on several fronts. The main reason is that you over shoot the 60ish% of the population with immunity from infection that is needed for herd immunity. If you go the way of getting all the infections out of the way quickly you get 90%+/- of the population infected in a short time, so a lot more people die. If you get to herd immunity more slowly, you don't over shoot as much, and maybe 30-40% of the population never gets infected instead of only 10%. It is also problematic because of another big point...

... immunity, whether from surviving infections or from vaccines, is not likely to be permanent. Right now we don't even know for sure that you do get immunity if you survive it, but the working average is about a year, based on similar viruses. This could be off on either side, and will vary for individuals. But it is very likely that this will become seasonal. If we develop effective vaccines and/or treatments, then it will be something like the flu that is manageable. The interrelation of points two and three is that assuming immunity wears off (which is highly likely) if you go for getting to herd immunity quickly in terms of time, then you also compress the time when everyone is once again vulnerable. This leads to more spikes AND makes it harder to get back to r<1 via herd immunity because most of the population is vulnerable at the same time.
Ok, Now bottom line that for me! Whew... That wasn't any fun either. Thanks.

Your post made me think of this... https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=mcafee&p=brian+regan+pop+tarts+youtube#id=1&vid=d9f14c75f7298a3c925cb8f072d0dda3&action=click
 

grange45

Active member
T
Just sharing the following - gas tax was raised in Ohio last summer and with people driving a lot less now there will be a shortage of money for road projects.

Here are the current taxes in Ohio:

Ohio Cigarette and Tobacco Excise Taxes
Total Ohio Cigarette Taxes
$1.60 / pack
Federal Tax on Cigarette
$1.00 / pack

Ohio Gas Excise Tax: $0.38.5 / gallon
Federal Gas Tax $0.18.4/gallon

Federal Excise Alcohol Taxes
The U.S. government collects these alcohol taxes per gallon.
Alcohol taxes Beer…….$18.00
Wine…….$1.07 to $3.40 depending on alcohol content.
Spirits……$13.50

To beer Ohio adds an extra excise tax of 18 cents per gallon. For wine the added tax is 32 cents. But for wine with alcohol from over 14% to 21% alcohol, the tax jumps to $1.00. For vermouth, it’s $1.10. And for sparkling wine, it’s $1.50.

Wine, spirits, and beer are subject to sales taxes. The state rate is 5.75%. But local rates can be 2.25%. Thus, the tax can be as high as 8%.
Then increase the state tax temporarily by 2% for each. That would make a good dent to the deficit and not hurt the students that don't buy them (well they shouldn't...but know some do).

There's a reason why Ohio didn't close liquor stores...the tax revenue. Customers would still be willing to fork over a couple of bucks each sale for smokes and booze. Instead the students, athletes, and teachers take the brunt.

Also, you can easily temporarily tax gas right now...tax it out of the wazoo so they skyrocket so people would stay at home and do unnecessary travel. Hasn't that what we've been trying to do?
 
Last edited:
The money is coming, just be patient. Bernie Sanders is winning. The right wing deficit hawks are all dead. 1999 to 2020 the debt went from
0 to 25 trillion. So now just double it and you can give every household $10,000 a month for two years. Instead the lions share of stimulus goes to
the most connected. We are a socialist country now when it comes to corporations, so we might as well go all in. Does anyone really expect the debt could ever be paid anyway?. Donny will do what he does best, bankrupting the organization he is in charge of.
 

grange45

Active member
Just wait. Marijuana will be legalized soon in Ohio to tax it to make up the deficit. Not saying it’s right or wrong but it’s an easy money maker. I was shocked when gambling was okayed a while back here to do the same.

Does anyone know how much of a percentage of state tax dollars go towards public education (which helps school sports)?
 

CedarBuck92

Active member
Also, you can easily temporarily tax gas right now...tax it out of the wazoo so they skyrocket so people would stay at home and do unnecessary travel. Hasn't that what we've been trying to do?
The issue with this is that you unintentionally punish the workers who still have to drive to work.

The money is coming, just be patient. Bernie Sanders is winning. The right wing deficit hawks are all dead. 1999 to 2020 the debt went from
0 to 25 trillion. So now just double it and you can give every household $10,000 a month for two years.
Don't forget to tax it all at 80%.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
The money is coming, just be patient. Bernie Sanders is winning. The right wing deficit hawks are all dead. 1999 to 2020 the debt went from
0 to 25 trillion. So now just double it and you can give every household $10,000 a month for two years. Instead the lions share of stimulus goes to
the most connected. We are a socialist country now when it comes to corporations, so we might as well go all in. Does anyone really expect the debt could ever be paid anyway?. Donny will do what he does best, bankrupting the organization he is in charge of.
Amen. It's funny how it's bad socialism when it's money to buy food for children, it's good socialism when 10, 20, 30 times more go to corporations.
 

Running Man 101

Active member
Amen. It's funny how it's bad socialism when it's money to buy food for children, it's good socialism when 10, 20, 30 times more go to corporations.
Agree, funny how the big banks and corporations all support the DEMS now. If you want to understand the local school issues, just look at how the local governments give away their tax base for "jobs".

Facts matter. The Chicago con man can talk a good game.

1588850469737.png
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
psycho dad,

Most of what you write usually is correct. You have cherry picked information in a few Northern States long ago (laws found to be unconstitutional). The purpose and intent of the 2nd amendment is crystal clear. You can read about it here for a good synopsis. Reasonable people can discus the limits on weapons, but the right to have one to protect yourself and your property is not. If there was a real gun violence issue in the country, you'd know it. You do know that more people die from failing out of bed in a given year than die from AR platforms. More than 90% of the deaths (of your 35%) are related to drugs--knowing this drugs should be illegal, but people still have them. The most unpublished stat in the US is how many crimes DON'T happen because people have them.
I'll give you that the gun enthusiasts won the battle of the supreme court. Good for them. It's not crystal clear. It is crystal clear to me in a complete different meaning. That's ok, My family doesn't need guns. I've tried and tried to figure out what the point of 90% of the 35% of murders are drug related is. Who cares? It's an excuse. I don't care about guns, I don't need one, so I don't have one. Why don't you publish how many crimes don't happen because people have guns?
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
HMM...Looks like it started going up there in the 80's A little dip there for some reason, then trending up there in the Bush years. Now, did something happen around 2007-2008 that might have had an effect on it? Thank goodness it's been going down so sharply here in the last 3 years. Talk about picking and choosing. Don't worry, Come November there is a chance to get people in to save the economy again. Big banks and corps hedge their bets.

There is also an actual bona fide con man as president right now. Proven in court fraud. Flimflammer. Genuine snake oil salesman.
 
Last edited:
The unpublished stat of how many crimes are prevented by gun toting citizens, is sadly
like the Bowling Green Massacre, an alternate fact.
 
.
Top