57Brave
Well-known member
there is no circumstance where an insult wins the day
............
Did I insult you over your Congressman Shiff allegations ?
116th Congress
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
there is no circumstance where an insult wins the day
............
Did I insult you over your Congressman Shiff allegations ?
Its wasn't an allegation. Its a stone cold fact.
sturg33
I
I'm against all wellfare.
I dont believe the citizens of a city should have to subsidize a business ess or the decisions of others.
While I believe Amazon coming to NYC would be a net positive for the city, I dont believe other citizens should have to pay more (or get less benefits) in order to accommodate them.
Just Amash has a very good Twitter thread on this I posted when this decision was being made.
But you are skating past my main point like you frequently do. AOC is dangerous when it comes to economics
sturg33
I
They can rarely if ever think beyond step 1
Its all about dividing along racial and economic lines. Enraging the population so that you can take advantage of the most uninformed voters who have real issues that wouldn't be addressed by these stupid economic philosophies.
57Brave
Well-known member
no, she has a different view than you
Trup is dangerous in his approach to separation of powers
AOC is a first term congressperson.
..................................
Remember Grasshopper -
"when they cant win on the policy they attack the politics
and when they cant win the politics they attack the personal"
in other words, every time you make your point using the personal -- you've already lost
Trup is dangerous in his approach to separation of powers
AOC is a first term congressperson.
..................................
Remember Grasshopper -
"when they cant win on the policy they attack the politics
and when they cant win the politics they attack the personal"
in other words, every time you make your point using the personal -- you've already lost
Its not about a different view.
Its about right and wrong.
She is wrong and has shown herself to be wrong on almost all things financially related.
I'm actually with her on a lot of the wealthy elite pinching the power from the everyday person. But the methods to solve that is where I differ greatly.
Its about right and wrong.
She is wrong and has shown herself to be wrong on almost all things financially related.
I'm actually with her on a lot of the wealthy elite pinching the power from the everyday person. But the methods to solve that is where I differ greatly.
57Brave
Well-known member
tell me more about how Congressman Shiff aided and abetted an FBI fraud --- FISA , something something something
This is AOC's prime constituency.
Even after the facts are presented they still don't understand because of a lack of mental capacity and those that have been drummed up by leftist racial/social divides.
Far too many of these sheep in the country.
Take it to the other thread but you lack the ability to have any analytical thought process so I doubt it matters.
sturg33
I
Dude. She is wrong. It's not an opinion. She is wrong.
You are wrong.
It's been explained to you and you still post misinformation.
That's kinda like lying.
57Brave
Well-known member
I never said she was right or wrong , never weighed in on Amazon NYC--- you can look it up
I did and do find it ridiculous the amount of time you spend sifting the sands of a first termer
Case could be made for the analogy of fiddling while Rome burns. But Fox News gave you guys a new shiney thing -- a woman --- a brown skinned woman.
That dont take no sht from Tikibois
She's got you attention does she ?
I did and do find it ridiculous the amount of time you spend sifting the sands of a first termer
Case could be made for the analogy of fiddling while Rome burns. But Fox News gave you guys a new shiney thing -- a woman --- a brown skinned woman.
That dont take no sht from Tikibois
She's got you attention does she ?
57Brave
Well-known member
oh, I did bring up Sun Trust Park ... or I could have brought up tax initiated local major construction projects that promise hundreds of construction jobs -- to only learn out of town builders with their own crews will be doing the work.
Leaving locals to clean the sheeets and cook the meals for those hundreds of workers.
Using the $3B number , yes, that $3B would have been better spent on road improvements or local recreation or any number of other local needs.
did she not dot an I or cross a Tee to your liking ?
I dont know, I try to stay out of the weeds of NYC politics
Leaving locals to clean the sheeets and cook the meals for those hundreds of workers.
Using the $3B number , yes, that $3B would have been better spent on road improvements or local recreation or any number of other local needs.
did she not dot an I or cross a Tee to your liking ?
I dont know, I try to stay out of the weeds of NYC politics
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
The left has been railing against corporate subsidies for years, at least here in Minnesota. We've had all kinds of stadiums built on the public dime and outside of the construction jobs inherent in the building of the structures, the economic spin-off has been negligible. Of course, Ziggy Wilf and the Pohlads watched the value of their franchises increase markedly once a new stadium associated with the team was erected. Who was pushing for the stadiums? Downtown fatcats. The micro-left and the libertarian-leaning conservatives opposed the ventures.
What developments like the Amazon deal usually show is a re-location of business opportunity as opposed to an increase. If there's going to be a hot new part of town, somewhere someone else in the city is going to feel a chill. There may or not be an uptick in surrounding residential real estate depending on the quality of the housing stock. What usually happen is that renters are priced out of their properties and homeowners may be taxed out of their property due to their rapidly rising home values. It's not unheard of that properties are condemned by the city, homeowners are paid off at a price below what the true market would bear, and a luxury high-rise goes up. Development incentives basically work for the person seeking them and very few others.
What developments like the Amazon deal usually show is a re-location of business opportunity as opposed to an increase. If there's going to be a hot new part of town, somewhere someone else in the city is going to feel a chill. There may or not be an uptick in surrounding residential real estate depending on the quality of the housing stock. What usually happen is that renters are priced out of their properties and homeowners may be taxed out of their property due to their rapidly rising home values. It's not unheard of that properties are condemned by the city, homeowners are paid off at a price below what the true market would bear, and a luxury high-rise goes up. Development incentives basically work for the person seeking them and very few others.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Weird. That’s just a slightly different formulation of the same objection that the opponents of the deal had.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
In NYC? You think?
There isn't a saturation point for NY. Whats happening in Queens/Brooklyn and even the Bronx now is a result of the overflow from Manhattan. Amazon or no Amazon there is tremendous development taking place in this region. Amazon would have just accelerated that process but it will happen nonetheless.