Good faith privately-funded White House ballroom discussion

P
Callatoroy said:
What kind of question / response is that? First it’s "there are no private funds". Then "there won't be enough private funds". Now it’s "what if the private funds go missing" At this point, all you have to bitch about is he didn't follow protocol and I don't like the drawing.
Click to expand...
Bill - he’s just joking. He knows full well the ballroom is just another way for Trump to grift.
 
I love how our conservative mooks keep referring to following the law as "respecting protocol.'

It's not protocol dipshits. Protocol is something optional that one does for appearances. The law specifies what people MUST do (usually)
 
superrific said:
I love how our conservative mooks keep referring to following the law as "respecting protocol.'

It's not protocol dipshits. Protocol is something optional that one does for appearances. The law specifies what people MUST do (usually)
Click to expand...
Following the law doesn’t make the top 50 of things they care about.
 
ChileG said:
P

Bill - he’s just joking. He knows full well the ballroom is just another way for Trump to grift.
Click to expand...
Its going to be HUUUUUUUUUGE, and tacky and full of gold shit everywhere. it will be named the DONALD J Trump Ballroom and will have a big ole
"🖕 libtards" at the bottom. And Don jr. is going to be purchasing a $400 million home in west palm beach.
 
Ramrouser said:
I wouldn't since it doesn't do any good. California alone has spent $30M on homelessness since 2019 and the homeless population has increased by 181,000. It just goes to the grifter NGO groups who want to keep the problem going for more funding.

At least you get to see a ballroom on the White House grounds after spending the money.
Click to expand...
$30M is a trifling amount. You sure you're not off by a factor of a thousand yet again?

If you actually knew people who work for NGOs, you'd know how deeply wrong your grifter accusation is, but of course when you have nothing you have to throw shit against the wall. Also, that's what *you* do when you have something but I digress.

California has a stubborn structural problem with homelessness that is unique to it. It is not representative of the state of affairs across the country. And, as usual, the things going wrong in California are the results of conservative bullshit. As anyone faintly familiar with California would know, the homelessness problem ultimately traces back to Proposition 13. It turns out that dumbass proposals like, "don't raise taxes anywhere" lead to bad outcomes.
 
Don't fall for the trap, people. It would be better for the taxpayers to build the ballroom than private donations.

For some reason calla, who says he hates money in politics, wants to go to a system of privately funded government, which isn't a democracy or really a government at all. He wants to kow tow to corporate overlords.
 
Ramrouser said:
I wouldn't since it doesn't do any good. California alone has spent $30M on homelessness since 2019 and the homeless population has increased by 181,000. It just goes to the grifter NGO groups who want to keep the problem going for more funding.

At least you get to see a ballroom on the White House grounds after spending the money.
Click to expand...
Yea, they can place pictures of the monstrosity above the checkouts at the grocery stores so people struggling to buy food can remember what's important.

So, if it isn't perfect the answer is to give up?

This sounds like a response from someone with money. The ballroom doesn't do anything to help the average American, food would. This with money seem to forget how fortunate they are. NOTE: I'm not saying you didn't work for what you have, we are still fortunate.

Now if the debate is that we could structure it better, i could agree with that, but first we have to convert those too ignorant to understand how food insecurity impacts everyone.
 
superrific said:
$30M is a trifling amount. You sure you're not off by a factor of a thousand yet again?

If you actually knew people who work for NGOs, you'd know how deeply wrong your grifter accusation is, but of course when you have nothing you have to throw shit against the wall. Also, that's what *you* do when you have something but I digress.

California has a stubborn structural problem with homelessness that is unique to it. It is not representative of the state of affairs across the country. And, as usual, the things going wrong in California are the results of conservative bullshit. As anyone faintly familiar with California would know, the homelessness problem ultimately traces back to Proposition 13. It turns out that dumbass proposals like, "don't raise taxes anywhere" lead to bad outcomes.
Click to expand...
I pay a shit ton in property tax every year, and it goes up by 2% every year. Prop 13 causes a lot of market and fairness issues, but it is not a "don't raise taxes" law. More like a limit the tax raising law.

And California's homelessness problem has a lot more factors than just conservative bullshit. NIMBY-ism is just at home on the left as it is on the right. Liberals have backyards, too.

I'd put problem number 1 at exceptionally good weather, which makes homelessness a far more attractive option in LA than Madison, WI. Problem 2 is the extreme demand to live in the good weather, which pressures CoL. Problem 3 is the limit of buildable land due to geographical/water constraints not faced in the East. Problem 4 is the car culture legacy of the 1950s and the concurrent lack of density in housing construction (exacerbating Problem 3). Problem 5 gets into Prop 13 and certain California values (lack of neighborhood community, etc.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top