Progressives continue to weaponize government

[bripat9643]

you weren't talking about legal rights. You were talking about moral rights. We already know they have the legal right.

You made a dumb statement, and now you're trying to weasel out of it.

Ok, then show my quote where I called it a moral right. You are straight up lying now because you made an idiotic statement. Show the quote or take a hike. You’re done

"As a conservative don’t you think a city has the right to decide what kind of businesses they license to operate in their borders? I grew up in a city that did and still does not allow fast food, billboards, or strip clubs in the city limits... isn’t that their right?"

You obviously meant moral right because it's clear from your example that the city already had the legal right.

No, it’s clear that I’m asking a conservative who is supposed to be a supporter of a constitutional republic a question about states rights. You can twist and turn all you want but I never said a word about morality, your done with this argument. Just give up.

You didn't say a thing about states' rights, liar. You sail simply that a city has the right to ban Walmart from it's within its borders.

You're the one doing the twist. You obviously weren't talking about the law. Your original post assumed the law allowed it. You were talking about rights. That's a moral issue.

I know what I meant better than you know what I meant. Keep fighting a losing battle though your lack awareness about how foolish you sound is amusing to me.

Your statements are contradictory.

 

[bripat9643]

Walmarts are total disaster for small towns. Ruins the culture totally

You remind me of the genetic disasters in this video.



Walmart does have some negative impacts in some towns, but in the big picture they bring in jobs,, shit people need at a low price and attract other businesses around them.

Not that you're employable or give a shit about people other than yourself anyway.


.

/—-/ Libs like to glorify small business when they block Walmart, but growing up in a small town local businesses jack up prices because there is little or no competition. Walmart comes in and gives them a run for their money and often the little guy doesn’t know how to compete. Woolworths and Macy’s did the same thing back in their day. Nothing new.

Let's just say the minimum wage should be $12 an hour, not Walmart bologna. And everybody at Walmart seems to work 30 hours so they don't have to give any benefits. Macy's and Walworth didn't do that crap. Walmart loves to torture their workers...

Why should it be $12/hr?

It is a fair number, every other rich country has the minimum wage of at least that. Australia $19. It is also equal to the 1968 Great Society minimum wage.

How did you determine it was "fair?" Based on what?

 

[bripat9643]

Yet another reason that rational people are small government, constitutional conservatives. When the left gets in government, they exploit the powers of office and then they weaponize government to expand their power and wealth.

“Walmart does not belong in New York City,” de Blasio declares, while defending the city’s generous tax breaks for Amazon.

Why would Bill de Blasio declare that any business doesn't belong in New York City? Why would he brag about turning away jobs and tax revenue for the city he is supposed to serve?

NYC Rolls Out the Red Carpet for Amazon, but Bans Walmart

As a conservative don’t you think a city has the right to decide what kind of businesses they license to operate in their borders?
I grew up in a city that did and still does not allow fast food, billboards, or strip clubs in the city limits... isn’t that their right?

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

 

[bripat9643]

They have no such right.

Of course they do. Why do you think otherwise?

Government has no rights. It only has responsibilities.

Now we are playing word games?! Ok buddy. You win, congrats

/—-/ That is not a word game. It’s part of American Exceptionalism. Our Constitution limits government and protects the people.

It’s exactly a word game. When I say a city has the right to do something it clearly means they have the legal authority, but Bri wants to play world games to score fantasy points to make up for all the dumb ass statements he makes. At least that’s what appears to be happening. That’s fine though he can have what ever win he wants, I’m not interested in playing word games.

No it doesn't. You gave an example of a city that had already done those things and then asked if it had the right to do them.

 

[Dragonlady]

Yet another reason that rational people are small government, constitutional conservatives. When the left gets in government, they exploit the powers of office and then they weaponize government to expand their power and wealth.

“Walmart does not belong in New York City,” de Blasio declares, while defending the city’s generous tax breaks for Amazon.

Why would Bill de Blasio declare that any business doesn't belong in New York City? Why would he brag about turning away jobs and tax revenue for the city he is supposed to serve?

NYC Rolls Out the Red Carpet for Amazon, but Bans Walmart

As a conservative don’t you think a city has the right to decide what kind of businesses they license to operate in their borders?
I grew up in a city that did and still does not allow fast food, billboards, or strip clubs in the city limits... isn’t that their right?

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

The extent and level of your total ignorance as to how things work in the real world, is beyond belief. But it does make it understandable why you voted for Trump and why you think he's doing a good job.

If someone wants to open a slaughterhouse right next door to your house, can they do it? Of course not. The zoning won't allow it. You simply do not allow any area of your town to be zoned for strip parlours, or fast food restaurants, or whatever else your citizens want to ban.

You have "dry counties" where the citizens have banned bars, and pubs. They are generally ringed by townships with roadhouses and bars, to take advantage of the thirsty citizens in neighbouring dry areas.



Try googling how thinks work and stop posting bullshit.

 

[bripat9643]

Yet another reason that rational people are small government, constitutional conservatives. When the left gets in government, they exploit the powers of office and then they weaponize government to expand their power and wealth.
Why would Bill de Blasio declare that any business doesn't belong in New York City? Why would he brag about turning away jobs and tax revenue for the city he is supposed to serve?

NYC Rolls Out the Red Carpet for Amazon, but Bans Walmart

As a conservative don’t you think a city has the right to decide what kind of businesses they license to operate in their borders?
I grew up in a city that did and still does not allow fast food, billboards, or strip clubs in the city limits... isn’t that their right?

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

The extent and level of your total ignorance as to how things work in the real world, is beyond belief. But it does make it understandable why you voted for Trump and why you think he's doing a good job.

If someone wants to open a slaughterhouse right next door to your house, can they do it? Of course not. The zoning won't allow it. You simply do not allow any area of your town to be zoned for strip parlours, or fast food restaurants, or whatever else your citizens want to ban.

You have "dry counties" where the citizens have banned bars, and pubs. They are generally ringed by townships with roadhouses and bars, to take advantage of the thirsty citizens in neighbouring dry areas.



Try googling how thinks work and stop posting bullshit.

First off, we aren't talking about what the law says. We're talking about what it should say. The law used to allow slavery. Do you think slavery was moral before 1860?

Slaughterhouses give off all kinds of effluents that damage the right of its neighbors to enjoy their property. However, people in the meat business want to build their plant on cheap land to keep their prices down. The land in the middle of a populated residential area is not cheap. No one would build a meat packing plant there even if it was legal.

On the other hand, Walmart is no different that any other store in the neighborhood. In fact, it's convenient to have one around. They provide something that people want.

As for "dry counties," that's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Why should 'A' prevent 'B' from selling liquor? There's absolutely no justification for it.

 

[Dragonlady]

As a conservative don’t you think a city has the right to decide what kind of businesses they license to operate in their borders?
I grew up in a city that did and still does not allow fast food, billboards, or strip clubs in the city limits... isn’t that their right?

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

The extent and level of your total ignorance as to how things work in the real world, is beyond belief. But it does make it understandable why you voted for Trump and why you think he's doing a good job.

If someone wants to open a slaughterhouse right next door to your house, can they do it? Of course not. The zoning won't allow it. You simply do not allow any area of your town to be zoned for strip parlours, or fast food restaurants, or whatever else your citizens want to ban.

You have "dry counties" where the citizens have banned bars, and pubs. They are generally ringed by townships with roadhouses and bars, to take advantage of the thirsty citizens in neighbouring dry areas.



Try googling how thinks work and stop posting bullshit.

First off, we aren't talking about what the law says. We're talking about what it should say. The law used to allow slavery. Do you think slavery was moral before 1860?

Slaughterhouses give off all kinds of effluents that damage the right of its neighbors to enjoy their property. However, people in the meat business want to build their plant on cheap land to keep their prices down. The land in the middle of a populated residential area is not cheap. No one would build a meat packing plant there even if it was legal.

On the other hand, Walmart is no different that any other store in the neighborhood. In fact, it's convenient to have one around. They provide something that people want.

As for "dry counties," that's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Why should 'A' prevent 'B' from selling liquor? There's absolutely no justification for it.

If the majority of the citizens in that jurisidiction don't want liquor sold in their town, and they have it on the ballot, who are YOU to say that the majority of townspeople can't have what they voted for? It's medically proven that drinking is bad for you, and most of the people in the town are Mormons who don't drink anyway. You don't like it, live somewhere else.

Laws are a reflection of the times in which we live. I have no idea of what was considered "moral" prior to 1860 because I haven't studied historical sociology or the laws of the times. I have enough trouble keeping up with the changing laws and mores in the times in which I live.

I also find this current fascination with applying today's standards of behaviour to people from the past to be both pointless, and counterproductive. If humans aren't evolving and becoming more respectful of people who aren't like them, then we're doomed to continue to fight pointless wars based on race, religion and xenophobia, and we've learned nothing from the past 3000 years of religious enlightenment. That would be pretty sad.

But it's pointless because we can't change the people from the past, and their embrace of slavery is not our cross to bear, but what is your cross to bear is the results of those policies, some of which reverbrate today. And without acknowledging the mistakes of the past, you can't acknowledge the long term damage done by generations of slavery, followed by another 100 years of poverty and segregation, and now, with the mass incareration of young black males in "for profit" prisons, you now have reverted to slavery.

American now has more black and brown men in for work-farm for-profit prisons where they are forced to work for less than minimum wages, in dangerous and toxic enviornments, than were freed as slaves in 1860. Slavery is back and it's bigger than ever.

 

[Cellblock2429]

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

The extent and level of your total ignorance as to how things work in the real world, is beyond belief. But it does make it understandable why you voted for Trump and why you think he's doing a good job.

If someone wants to open a slaughterhouse right next door to your house, can they do it? Of course not. The zoning won't allow it. You simply do not allow any area of your town to be zoned for strip parlours, or fast food restaurants, or whatever else your citizens want to ban.

You have "dry counties" where the citizens have banned bars, and pubs. They are generally ringed by townships with roadhouses and bars, to take advantage of the thirsty citizens in neighbouring dry areas.



Try googling how thinks work and stop posting bullshit.

First off, we aren't talking about what the law says. We're talking about what it should say. The law used to allow slavery. Do you think slavery was moral before 1860?

Slaughterhouses give off all kinds of effluents that damage the right of its neighbors to enjoy their property. However, people in the meat business want to build their plant on cheap land to keep their prices down. The land in the middle of a populated residential area is not cheap. No one would build a meat packing plant there even if it was legal.

On the other hand, Walmart is no different that any other store in the neighborhood. In fact, it's convenient to have one around. They provide something that people want.

As for "dry counties," that's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Why should 'A' prevent 'B' from selling liquor? There's absolutely no justification for it.

If the majority of the citizens in that jurisidiction don't want liquor sold in their town, and they have it on the ballot, who are YOU to say that the majority of townspeople can't have what they voted for? It's medically proven that drinking is bad for you, and most of the people in the town are Mormons who don't drink anyway. You don't like it, live somewhere else.

Laws are a reflection of the times in which we live. I have no idea of what was considered "moral" prior to 1860 because I haven't studied historical sociology or the laws of the times. I have enough trouble keeping up with the changing laws and mores in the times in which I live.

I also find this current fascination with applying today's standards of behaviour to people from the past to be both pointless, and counterproductive. If humans aren't evolving and becoming more respectful of people who aren't like them, then we're doomed to continue to fight pointless wars based on race, religion and xenophobia, and we've learned nothing from the past 3000 years of religious enlightenment. That would be pretty sad.

But it's pointless because we can't change the people from the past, and their embrace of slavery is not our cross to bear, but what is your cross to bear is the results of those policies, some of which reverbrate today. And without acknowledging the mistakes of the past, you can't acknowledge the long term damage done by generations of slavery, followed by another 100 years of poverty and segregation, and now, with the mass incareration of young black males in "for profit" prisons, you now have reverted to slavery.

American now has more black and brown men in for work-farm for-profit prisons where they are forced to work for less than minimum wages, in dangerous and toxic enviornments, than were freed as slaves in 1860. Slavery is back and it's bigger than ever.

/——-/ “ I have no idea of what was considered "moral" prior to 1860 because I haven't studied historical sociology or the laws of the times.”
You should. It’s fascinating. Read the history of alcohol in the US. Children were given booze because drinking water was not reliable or safe. Moonshine was more profitable than whole corn and cheaper to transport.

 

[danielpalos]

Taxes on recreational drugs should also go to fund public transportation.

Free public transportation could be planned to be Commerce friendly.

 

[bripat9643]

They have no such right.

The citizens absolutely DO have the right to ban certain business establishments within the city limits.

They have no such right.

The extent and level of your total ignorance as to how things work in the real world, is beyond belief. But it does make it understandable why you voted for Trump and why you think he's doing a good job.

If someone wants to open a slaughterhouse right next door to your house, can they do it? Of course not. The zoning won't allow it. You simply do not allow any area of your town to be zoned for strip parlours, or fast food restaurants, or whatever else your citizens want to ban.

You have "dry counties" where the citizens have banned bars, and pubs. They are generally ringed by townships with roadhouses and bars, to take advantage of the thirsty citizens in neighbouring dry areas.



Try googling how thinks work and stop posting bullshit.

First off, we aren't talking about what the law says. We're talking about what it should say. The law used to allow slavery. Do you think slavery was moral before 1860?

Slaughterhouses give off all kinds of effluents that damage the right of its neighbors to enjoy their property. However, people in the meat business want to build their plant on cheap land to keep their prices down. The land in the middle of a populated residential area is not cheap. No one would build a meat packing plant there even if it was legal.

On the other hand, Walmart is no different that any other store in the neighborhood. In fact, it's convenient to have one around. They provide something that people want.

As for "dry counties," that's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Why should 'A' prevent 'B' from selling liquor? There's absolutely no justification for it.

If the majority of the citizens in that jurisidiction don't want liquor sold in their town, and they have it on the ballot, who are YOU to say that the majority of townspeople can't have what they voted for? It's medically proven that drinking is bad for you, and most of the people in the town are Mormons who don't drink anyway. You don't like it, live somewhere else.

What if they don't want black people in their town? Do they have the right to lynch them? Do they have the right to ban Mexicans or Muzzies? You realize, of course, that you're just a Stalinist who believes you have the right to impose your values on others. People left old Europe and came to America precisely to avoid Neanderthals like you.

I won't waste my time dealing with the rest of your idiocies. You've already shown your Stalinist cloven hoof.

 

[danielpalos]

Government solves all problems for the right wing. We have a First Amendment, for a reason.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Taxes on recreational drugs should also go to fund public transportation.

Free public transportation could be planned to be Commerce friendly.

/——/ Taxes are put in the general funds so politicians can buy their re-election with giveaways

 

[danielpalos]

Taxes on recreational drugs should also go to fund public transportation.

Free public transportation could be planned to be Commerce friendly.

/——/ Taxes are put in the general funds so politicians can buy their re-election with giveaways

Cannabis is legal in California. Some revenue could go toward free public transportation that has Commerce in mind.

 

[francoHFW]

Garbage propaganda.

That’s what every leftist says every time they get owned. That data comes directly from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), snowflake.

What a lying sack of s***. Your Heroes would be proud of you LOL quote the whole thing jackass

 

[francoHFW]

He is different in the policies he has. Mainly cutting taxes on the rich and giant corporations and screwing everyone else.

Thank you!!! He’s the same exact person he’s always been (as a life-long NY liberal). Policies are not personality. And you leftists have attacked his personality.

Policies make the politician. You're right he is still a piece of s*** narcissist a****** lying mobbed up business cheat and failure.You dupes are always voting for misinformation and against policies that would help you. Brain-washed functional moron.

 

[francoHFW]

What about state and local taxes which the non-rich pay at about twice the rate of the rich.

What about it?

A. Where is your reliable source to back up your outrageous claim?

B. Local taxes are irrelevant. They are nominal and no local municipality is $21 trillion in debt.

After 35 years of GOP give away to the rich in tax rates, state and local taxes are huge thanks to the lack of Federal Aid to the states.how many times do I have to tell you to Google the only tax graph you need to know, dumbass? U.s. tax statistics, and has only gotten worse.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw1PG7bnVd-HdavXUNlS0wuq

Add up federal and state and local taxes and everybody who makes any money pays between 24 and 29%. If that is not a flat tax, tell me what it is...

 

[francoHFW]

You remind me of the genetic disasters in this video.



Walmart does have some negative impacts in some towns, but in the big picture they bring in jobs,, shit people need at a low price and attract other businesses around them.

Not that you're employable or give a shit about people other than yourself anyway.


.

/—-/ Libs like to glorify small business when they block Walmart, but growing up in a small town local businesses jack up prices because there is little or no competition. Walmart comes in and gives them a run for their money and often the little guy doesn’t know how to compete. Woolworths and Macy’s did the same thing back in their day. Nothing new.

Let's just say the minimum wage should be $12 an hour, not Walmart bologna. And everybody at Walmart seems to work 30 hours so they don't have to give any benefits. Macy's and Walworth didn't do that crap. Walmart loves to torture their workers...

Why should it be $12/hr?

It is a fair number, every other rich country has the minimum wage of at least that. Australia $19. It is also equal to the 1968 Great Society minimum wage.

How did you determine it was "fair?" Based on what?

Facts and history, troll.

 

[bripat9643]

/—-/ Libs like to glorify small business when they block Walmart, but growing up in a small town local businesses jack up prices because there is little or no competition. Walmart comes in and gives them a run for their money and often the little guy doesn’t know how to compete. Woolworths and Macy’s did the same thing back in their day. Nothing new.

Let's just say the minimum wage should be $12 an hour, not Walmart bologna. And everybody at Walmart seems to work 30 hours so they don't have to give any benefits. Macy's and Walworth didn't do that crap. Walmart loves to torture their workers...

Why should it be $12/hr?

It is a fair number, every other rich country has the minimum wage of at least that. Australia $19. It is also equal to the 1968 Great Society minimum wage.

How did you determine it was "fair?" Based on what?

Facts and history, troll.

What facts and what history?

 

[Slade3200]

Of course they do. Why do you think otherwise?

Government has no rights. It only has responsibilities.

Now we are playing word games?! Ok buddy. You win, congrats

/—-/ That is not a word game. It’s part of American Exceptionalism. Our Constitution limits government and protects the people.

It’s exactly a word game. When I say a city has the right to do something it clearly means they have the legal authority, but Bri wants to play world games to score fantasy points to make up for all the dumb ass statements he makes. At least that’s what appears to be happening. That’s fine though he can have what ever win he wants, I’m not interested in playing word games.

No it doesn't. You gave an example of a city that had already done those things and then asked if it had the right to do them.

Exactly, the legal right. Get over it, you lost this one pages ago

 

[bripat9643]

Government has no rights. It only has responsibilities.

Now we are playing word games?! Ok buddy. You win, congrats

/—-/ That is not a word game. It’s part of American Exceptionalism. Our Constitution limits government and protects the people.

It’s exactly a word game. When I say a city has the right to do something it clearly means they have the legal authority, but Bri wants to play world games to score fantasy points to make up for all the dumb ass statements he makes. At least that’s what appears to be happening. That’s fine though he can have what ever win he wants, I’m not interested in playing word games.

No it doesn't. You gave an example of a city that had already done those things and then asked if it had the right to do them.

Exactly, the legal right. Get over it, you lost this one pages ago

You asked if it had the legal right to do what it had already done? Not even you are that stupid.