Ocasio-Cortez suggests 70% tax for wealthy to fund climate change plan

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...te-change-plan.548561/page-15#post-1070075798

 

reality check:

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3Wkn...n_regimes_supported_by_the_United_States.html

 

Have you or anyone on this forum ever considered the rate we're removing fossil fuels from the Earth and how long those fuels will last for our descendants? Has anyone ever asked what they will do after there's no fossil fuels left? Renewable energy sources will not only help us now--and the global warming--but it would be an investment on humanity's future. I know many of you won't care, but I'm weird. I do care.

 

Your opinion without legal precedent means nothing. Of course a party can be drawn from the conclusion that they hate Fox News since it is the only major national news channel with any conservative slant. There are literally SNL skits making fun of this very position and its clearly in the vernacular of politics and social media Even a Canadian should be aware of this Cubed. You are just embarrassing yourself. Again.

The fact she was going to be a roommate and pay rent. Your mistake was to assume she wouldn't be signing into a lease agreement without evidence

lol Says the guy who can't even understand what a lease agreement and housing means.

So let me get this straight. You are making the claim the owner of the building who would be leasing the apartment is not a licensed housing provider and is therefore illegally offering housing and\or the people on the lease would not be adding this person to the lease which is the legal basis for tenants. Based on what Cubed? Tea Leaves? I already asked you for the evidence that they stated in the advertisement that any tenant would not be added to the lease and you would be right. Of course you ran from that. You just getting more amusing with each post.

If I failed to acknowledge it whom am I responding to here? And you used the plural "threads" Don't worry I expected you to back down once you were caught.

 

How does the fact you care about this means everyone should pay for it?

 

So what? Like I said, inferences don't count. You have to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that that is what they meant. There is enough lack of evidence to create reasonable doubt. Which is the standard of law.

You've never just rented a room on a handshake deal? Happens all the time in roommate situations, having been in one myself growing up.

And you are the one making the assumption that there was an actual 'lease' agreement. Your assuming something exists without evidence. The base point is to assume there is no agreement without evidence there is. You've got it backwards.

Says you lol. I note that there has been no lawsuits that have come of this (unless you know otherwise)? No legal proceedings against the 'discriminatory' home-owners.

Based on the lack of any evidence proving there Is a lease agreement.

Also, yes, the fact that they are advertising on Craigslist (rather then using an actual licensed housing lister) shows that they are an unlicensed housing provider.
But hey, your free to look them up here and actually prove it.

Here is the license you have to have to rent out rooms
https://dcra.dc.gov/service/get-one-family-rental-license

and here is the database for licensed individuals
https://eservices.dcra.dc.gov/BBLV/Default.aspx
(click on category and select 'Rooming House')

So which address is the house in question?

Should be simple for you if you have so much information that isn't in the news reports.

You spent pages saying that I never supported it, until I literally had to screen shot the message, and then suddenly you went dark. That's a failure of acknowledgement.

I did use plural. I just realized that you aren't worth the effort to go back and look. If you feel that this wins you another internet 'no-prize' then feel free to take your victory lap in front of an empty stadium.

 

Here's more:

 

She's a Know-It-All Idiot.

Extreme Environmentalists Are Anti-Human. “We must oppose these advocates of human suffering at every turn.”

 

Cute dodge.

BUT THE HASTILY IMPROVISED NARRATIVE!

No, Economists Don’t Agree a 70 Percent Top Marginal Tax Rate Is a Good Idea.

Hell, Paul Krugman and Paul Krugman can’t even agree on it.

 

Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Green New Deal’ Would Cost More Than the GDP of Most Countries.

“3,600 times the cost of the border wall.”

 

NEW SOCIALIST “IT GIRL” CONTINUES TO PAY DIVIDENDS:

AOC’s ‘Green New Deal’ Is a Century-Old Product of Ideological Recycling.

 

When you can get China and India to do the same let us know......till then NO!

 

Yes. We have 100s of years left. And within a decade or two, electric cars will be a standard, removing a massive portion of that usage, which will extend it further. We'll also have solar roofs which will relieve a massive amount of consumption on the power grids. And these technologies will advance WITH OR WITHOUT govt intervention. Tech companies WILL innovate. You don't need the fracking govt to tell them to be innovative, sorry. The funny thing is, we don't have enough minerals and precious metals to sustain the batteries....but do you care=) We'll need an alternative way to store all that alternative fuel. Ain't that a bitch?

 

LOL The inferences are on you. You are assuming she would not be signing a lease agreement with no evidence to support yourself as usual

LOL Never. Ever in my life. I always signed a lease agreement.

You would have to be a low grade moron to take on a roommate and not make them legally liable for the space they are renting.

That doesn't mean it would happen here because you weren't responsible enough to do so.

Wrong again. I'm saying the possibility exists and you dismiss that possibility to reinforce your failed argument.

LOL!!! Because she said she didn't want to sue. Good God Cubed thats in the original article. Can't you even read it?

Which is a requirement for housing and you are assuming without evidence she wouldn't be signing one. That's the fallacy in your argument.

LOL Please show us the rules of craigslist where it states if you advertise for a roomate you don't have to sign a lease agreement. I would LOVE to see that Cubed.

I'm going to try and simply this for you again since you are still having problems with basic reading. You are the one who is assuming the laws to protect tenants do not apply because you are assuming a lease agreement which is a requirement for leasing an apartment wouldn't apply because once again you assume the person in the lease agreement would simply blindly take in a roomate without making them responsible for the lease which is beyond laughable but very common for you to make that type of false assumption.

That is your fallacy and its why you keep losing this argument as you have so many others.

Never supported what? What the heck are you talking about?

LOL Typical Cubed. You get caught and instead of admitting you screwed up out come the personal attacks. Sad but typical of someone who gets too emotional and can't handle reality when its pointed out. Thanks for the entertainment.

 

Some people cannot imagine progress in anything w/o the government forcing leading the way.

 

That's because the negative is the assumed original state.
You have to prove something happened, not something didn't happen.

It's like the religious argument that says "well there is no evidence there isn't a God so it's assumed there is". Learn how proof works.

Good for you. Just because you have never doesn't mean it never happens.

I know it's crazy that things occur that are outside your world view/experience.

And it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

So what if the possibility exists? The possibility that the world leaders are lizards. Doesn't mean it's an actuality. That's why you have to Prove your position. Which you can't.

Missed that. Funny how that works if she has such a clear cut case.

And your assuming she had one without proof. Without proof we assume there isn't one. That's how the proof process works.

Never said it didn't. But you have not proven there was one offered. That onus is on you

So where on earth did you get onto lease agreements? Nothing in the article, the law (for housing or the exceptions) mentions lease agreements in anyway.

All it says is housing providers, which requires a license. If they had a license, prove it, otherwise your just making stuff up with no evidence and will be dismissed as such.

That I agreed with the study. You know, for someone who harps on "reading" so much, you don't do very much of it yourself

[QUOTE"guavaball, post: 1070085396, member: 72287"] Cubed. You get caught and instead of admitting you screwed up out come the personal attacks. Sad but typical of someone who gets too emotional and can't handle reality when its pointed out. Thanks for the entertainment. [/QUOTE]
Your the one who seems to be playing to a non existent crowd. I just said that if you want to take a victory lap because I used the plural instead of the singular, then go for it.

 

You must be a 'young guy'... we heard all this same crap back in the 1970's, during the big, phony "oil shortages" and the fraud about how the Earth had suddenly gotten to the point of running out of natural gas! What we've learned in the last 45 years is that there is NO shortage at all!

Does that mean that we should rely on fossil fuels indefinitely? Of course not! We should use the next 100 years (during which we'll have PLENTY of oil, gas, and coal) to develop and begin using HYDROGEN FUSION TECHNOLOGY! Solar, wind, geothermal, tides, etc., etc., absolutely pales in comparison to the promise of hydrogen fusion technology which would give us unlimited energy from molecules in sea water, and producing no pollution!

This is nothing so new! When I was at the University of Texas we actually had a primitive fusion reactor conducting experiments way back in the 1970's! It was called a "Tokamak". Link: https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/spt01

Afterthought: My favorite hyperliberal, loonie-tunes brain-fart for 'energy production' is burning dried cow turds and other 'bio-mass'. Makes for good comedy, if nothing else.... .

 

Well you ought to check this out...

Lockheed Martin Now Has a Patent For Its Potentially World Changing Fusion Reactor

 

Thank you! I'm truly delighted to hear that Lockheed Martin is going forward with this initiative. Truthfully, though, it will still be many years before we have any such reactors online -- but, better late than never!

In the meantime, the hyperliberal Left will have American taxpayers spending hundreds of billions on their hooptie, 'renewable energy' ideas. Solar, geothermal, biomass, etc., etc. Not BAD in themselves, but absolutely microscopic in significance compared to the promise of hydrogen fusion! But, what the hell, we Americans are "feeling wealthy" again, and we've got money to burn!

 

This should be called the leechers want more free **** thread

 

If we don't your descendants will be forced to. Is that what you want?

 

And every liberal 'entrepreneur' with some half-assed, crackpot idea about 'renewable energy' will go lobby the Socialist-Democrat morons in Congress for hundreds of millions of dollars. SOLYNDRA comes immediately to mind!

. "But, I mean, like, 'renewables' are, I mean, like -- SO COOL!"

 

Boondoggle nation, and the retards will complain about welfare for the rich and not realize they're causing it, and slipping further behind despite all of their free ****

 

Just like a conservative--push it onto someone else to change first, then fight it like a mad dog when you're the last in the room forced to accept the change. AOC is right, we should be first to lead the world in this crucial change. It's desperately needed for the stability of our country & the world. Having between 1 & 2 percent of our wealthiest families own & control so much (>98%) of our nation's total wealth, is NOT a stable situation, and must be changed.

 

We actually are. We have reduced CO2 much more than China or India. They can follow, we just should not have to pay them to do it like Obama wanted.