(12-13-2021 04:43 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 03:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 03:07 PM)CLTPirate Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:03 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:54 PM)CLTPirate Wrote:  Considering the fact that a large percentage of millionaires and billionaires live in California it seems unlikely it’s anywhere close to communism. Which is a government system that sees the wealthy stripped of their possessions and given back to working class.

Are you still in college?

Yeah but if it makes you feel any better I was a lefty way before I went to ECU. I had to work full time and goto community college to save up to goto university because I didn’t want any student debt. So I brought my leftiness to ECU.

So, you decided to be student debt-free, but are ok with the government coming in and taking your earned income to pay the school debt of others who decided not to go the debt-free route?

And to double down on the dumb, this build back broke nonsense will have ALL of us that worked hard, forwent new cars, elaborate vacations etc. to send our kids to college so they could graduate debt-free paying for OTHER peoples kids to go to school "free" for the rest of our lives and my kids lives.

And CLT congrats on doing things the "right" way, I traveled much the same path as you did. So, guess what? You too will very shortly have the privilege of paying for some other peoples kids that bought the too big house, bought new import cars every three years and never dreampt of having precious get a job to go to college on your dime too! For the rest of your life. That sound fair?

Anything free is worth what you paid for it anyway. That is a fact of life.

(12-13-2021 10:33 AM)CLTPirate Wrote:  If you guys hate California so much why are you concerned with how they govern themselves?

California liberalism is a cancer to the Nation. If the idiocy that’s born in California stayed in California no one would care. Unfortunately it spreads because the same enlightened morons who support nonsense like this move to other states when they realize their utopian ideas don’t work. See, for example, Nancy Pelosi moving to Florida, after her policies help destroy San Francisco.

Remember just because something gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling that doesn’t mean you should do it. If common sense tells you an idea won’t work, chances are it won’t work. All the virtue signaling in the world won’t change that.

(12-14-2021 12:21 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Anything free is worth what you paid for it anyway. That is a fact of life.

Truth…
It’s a shame common sense isn’t so common anymore.

(12-13-2021 08:01 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 07:24 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 06:17 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:06 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:33 AM)CLTPirate Wrote:  If you guys hate California so much why are you concerned with how they govern themselves?

Because eventually the rest of us will have to save their stupid asses. It will cost the rest of us a lot of money we don’t want to give to the idiots or a lot of patriots will have to die to do it. One or the other WILL happen.

Since you seem to be a southern miss fan I don’t think you have to worry about Mississippi bailing out California. Mississippi is one of the largest recipients of federal money to their budget compared to the federal taxes paid in from residents. MS takes in $20B more in federal funding than is paid in taxes from MS, while CA pays $6B more than they get back.

The rest of us are giving money to to MS, AL, LA that we don’t want to right now. Pull yourselves up by your bootstraps already.

It’s a near perfect example of how dumb the federal government is at managing money. Only a lib would complain about how bad the federal government is at managing money yet want even more control sent to them.

Factor in cost of living in the south and child tax credits which are driving forces in the “disparity.”

(12-13-2021 04:17 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:54 PM)CLTPirate Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:22 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:33 AM)CLTPirate Wrote:  If you guys hate California so much why are you concerned with how they govern themselves?

In one of my posts above I said let them do what they want.

We can still laugh at them for being communistic and idiotic.

Considering the fact that a large percentage of millionaires and billionaires live in California it seems unlikely it’s anywhere close to communism. Which is a government system that sees the wealthy stripped of their possessions and given back to working class.

Where were you indoctrinated?

Just wait until he has a family and supporting them becomes a priority....

Just you wait, ton o bricks

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

I was an idealistic 21 year old and then I had a child. Then I got a better job with better pay...and higher taxes. It didn't take long to understand I was no democrat.

(12-13-2021 11:28 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:58 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-12-2021 10:04 AM)Hernando Hills Tiger Wrote:  Cars kill more than guns.

When are they going to outlaw cars?

See the stupidity?

You will likely lose the right to drive your own car by the middle of the century. It will drive itself and the justification will be the death toll.

It can't happen soon enough.

Thank for your input Comrade!

If these lefties aren't worth anything at least they're good amusement. The mental contortions it takes to come up with and then support their insanity is worth seeing in action.

No, The SCOTUS Ruling On Abortion Doesn’t Affect California Gun Laws

Quote:You would never know it from the reaction of President Joe Biden and Gov. Gavin Newsom, but the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Friday about the Texas abortion case didn’t overturn Roe v. Wade. It dealt with arcane legal precedent over who can sue and be sued – what is called “standing” – and the constitutionality of Texas’ law is far from settled. On Saturday, hopefully because Newsom hadn’t yet read or understood the decision, he announced he would now use the ruling to help Californians enforce gun control laws.

Biden and Newsom’s comments are more likely to gin up anger from their supporters than have anything to do with the Supreme Court or the law.

Texas’s controversial law lets private citizens sue anyone who “aids or abets” most types of abortions performed after about six weeks. The only issue decided by the court is who you can sue.

Abortion rights advocates tried suing various state officials to get the law declared unconstitutional, but the court stopped their lawsuit because Texas state officials aren’t the enforcement for the law. The court has long held that you can only sue those who have directly harmed you.

The decision won’t stop people from further challenging the Texas law. Justice Neil Gorsuch’s majority opinion said those seeking to overturn the law couldn’t sue people such as state-court clerks who handle the paperwork by those suing or the state-court judges who decide those disputes. In a dissent authored by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by the three leftist justices, they agreed that state-court judges couldn’t be sued, but that court clerks could be.

But the ruling is hardly the end of this debate. Gorsuch’s decision said pre-enforcement lawsuits are allowed, and it explicitly lays out who the abortion advocates can sue in state courts. For example, eight of the justices agreed they can go forward with a lawsuit against state medical licensing officials.

Newsom wants to use this private legal action to enforce California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” and privately made guns (what gun control advocates call “ghost guns”). But his whole strategy is a bit of a mystery. California already bans anyone who manufactures, distributes, or sells assault weapons or ghost gun kits or parts. Their assault weapon ban has been in place for decades. There is no evidence that gun dealers in California have continued selling these banned weapons.

In addition, the Democrat-dominated Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld all of California’s gun control laws, so this indirect method of enforcement through private parties isn’t even necessary. The whole point of the Texas law is to avoid using state law enforcement to restrict abortions.

A number of legal experts believe courts will eventually strike down Texas’s law. In any case, Gorsuch’s opinion allows pre-enforcement challenges, and it has implications for what Newsom wants to do.

Pre-enforcement challenges will avoid any “chilling effect” on gun ownership. In addition, unlike the Texas law that targets anyone who “aids or abets” abortion, Newsom’s limiting his proposal to just manufacturers, distributors, or sellers means that he will be up against businesses who will be less intimidated by litigation costs.

One aspect missing from the whole debate is that the private enforcement of laws is hardly new. It is used for everything from minimum wage laws to rent control.

For example, if employers pay workers less than the minimum wage, the workers can sue to get back double the underpayment of wages. If a worker earns $5 per hour when the minimum is $7.25, he’d have about $4,500 in underpayments for a year — and a $9,000 payoff for suing. He will get compensated for however long he gets underpaid.

As a result, only a tiny fraction of 1 percent of Americans covered by the minimum wage are paid too little, and these rare violations mainly involve mistakes by employers, not outright lawbreaking. The only “cops” needed are fewer than 1,000 federal agents who are busy enforcing recordkeeping, child-labor standards, over time, and other labor regulations. Similarly, rent control laws are enforced by the renter being able to sue for overpayment of rent.

The entire debate over Newsom’s enforcement of gun control at this point is more theatrics than logic or legal substance. But that shouldn’t be surprising. Politicians can never pass up the opportunity to energize their base.

(12-14-2021 06:40 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:28 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:58 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-12-2021 10:04 AM)Hernando Hills Tiger Wrote:  Cars kill more than guns.

When are they going to outlaw cars?

See the stupidity?

You will likely lose the right to drive your own car by the middle of the century. It will drive itself and the justification will be the death toll.

It can't happen soon enough.

Thank for your input Comrade!

He probably wears a dog collar and has a ball gag in when he posts **** like that

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

(12-13-2021 11:28 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:58 AM)Claw Wrote:  You will likely lose the right to drive your own car by the middle of the century. It will drive itself and the justification will be the death toll.

It can't happen soon enough.

You do know you can make that happen. Give up your ride. Get yourself a bicycle or ride public transportation.

Why do all of you think you have the right to determine how everyone else lives? Is that just part of the control element in being a Leftist?

(12-14-2021 04:03 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:28 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 10:58 AM)Claw Wrote:  You will likely lose the right to drive your own car by the middle of the century. It will drive itself and the justification will be the death toll.

It can't happen soon enough.

You do know you can make that happen. Give up your ride. Get yourself a bicycle or ride public transportation.

Why do all of you think you have the right to determine how everyone else lives? Is that just part of the control element in being a Leftist?

his BASIC skills eroded to become C- (no ++)