lamarpye

I suspect this is what is taught in college these days. I would add punishing people for hard work seems to be more of a Stalin thing.

Why? I see people on HN indiscriminating shitting on Republicans. Why can't take a shit on an idiot on the left?

Is that stated policy of HN that only people on the right can be shitted on?

Didn't AOC disseminate that information to her minions recently? It has probably infected some of the HDBs on HN.

You could harvest some of the goats for meat. With some being a number less than the natural rate of increase of said goats.

I have heard about programs like this for 20 years.

You didn't understand what I wrote. I am talking about the group of people that were uninsurable because of preexisting conditions. This group of people was used as a reason for the ACA. However when a pilot program was run before the ACA went into effect, the size of said group appeared to vastly over-estimated.

So the reason for a special program would be to help the people that need it and not mess with the entire country insurance.

Was the ACA the best to address the problem of pre-existing conditions?

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/06/why-has...

"There were supposed to be millions of people who were uninsurable because of pre-existing conditions. We heard lengthy testimony about their terrible plight. I don't think it's too strong to say that this fear--that you could get sick and no one would insure you, that's right, you, Mr. & Mrs. Middle-Class Voter--was one of the main reasons offered for the health care overhaul. It was estimated by Medicare's Chief Actuary that around 400,000 would sign up (the CBO estimated 200,000, but only because they assumed that HHS would use its authority to limit enrollment in order to stay within the $5 billion budgeted for the program). So where are all the uninsurable people?"

So if this is accurate, that is the size of risk pool isn't that large. Wouldn't be better to create a special program for people who fall into this category?

I don't under how government pensions are stolen. If the funds are mismanaged, the taxpayer is responsible for making up the difference.

I didn't say uncontrolled growth was better, I said a vacant building tax would slow or restrict new development.

Of course there is waste, this is part of the cycle of boom and bust. The people that mistime the market will overbuild and lose their investment.

When the frenzy passes, house may stay empty, but the market will adjust. Fewer new houses will be build and people who stayed out of the market will have a chance to buy at cheaper prices.

Really? Why is it always better? Does this rule only apply to real estate?

That sounds like a great way to slow down real estate development. Make sure there is an additional cost if you oversupply the market.

Really? They are in the best position?

I see articles all of the time saying the US has too much retail space: https://www.businessinsider.com/the-retail-apocalypse-has-of... https://www.forbes.com/sites/bisnow/2017/04/05/even-develope...

It is not clear to me, why their asset prices are going to go up if there is too much supply.

Also does the building owner actually "own" the building or are they paying off a commercial loan?

The article you linked said that 50% was the average difference. What is the median difference? Without that data you can't really tell, if a degree pays for itself.

I like how we instinctively characterize prisoners as slaves. Seems like it trivializes actual slavery, but I have been out of school for awhile, so the conventional wisdom is probably different now.

This is certainly one way to look at it. Personally I see a lot of difference between the Axis and Allies, but I have a sense of proportion.

The US allows around 1 million legal immigrants every year. I don't see how this is moving an in opposite direction from Japan's recent changes.

Your link doesn't list the reason for extradition, doing some research on this issue, I see parental kidnapping generates a fair number of extradition requests.

I keep looking for excuses?

Let's recap:

I blamed the Motel 6 policy on the local ICE satrap. No you said, that is amazing mental acrobatics, it is Orange Man's fault. I point out the policy started out under Obama. You change the subject to the Border and accuse me of trying to pin Obama's policy on Obama. I never mentioned the Border, that was you changing the subject.

Wouldn't it been easier to just admit you didn't read the article carefully and you didn't notice the dates?

Maybe in your land admitting a mistake isn't allowed, perhaps there is this fear that it diminishes the Badness of Orange Man.

You are correct, the Republicans were in charge of the Senate in 2015 when this policy was in effect. I acknowledge my mistake.

This is something that you are unwilling to do. This post is on a particular policy started during the Obama administration. You blamed it on Trump. When called on it, you change the subject and accuse me of deflection.

>It's amazing the mental acrobatics that people go >through to try to find an after-the-fact justification >for targeted racist policy.

So if I understand your mindset correctly, blaming Trump is your way of creating an after-the-justification for Obama's targeted racist policy.

For the record, I don't find your mental acrobatics amazing, just lazy. It seems like it all flows from "Orange Man Bad".

No, you are not. You are blaming Trump for a policy that was started when Obama was President. This isn't a "whataboutism" situation. When called on it, you tried to blame Republican Senators, even though they were in the minority when this policy was started.

Aren't bank teller wages determined by the market? I don't see how they are underpaid if their salaries are market driven.

Edit: Strange. Getting some down votes. Is it because bank teller wages are not market driven or is it pointing out that fact is discouraged on this site.

I'll bet you went to the same school as the OP.

The one is San Jose is even worse. You have to show up 2 hours before the Post Office opens to get a spot.

Because Obama is in charge of the Executive Branch, the President sets policy and Obama was President for 8 years.

I also don't have this cognitive dissonance where I blame the current occupant of an office for the policy his predecessor started.

Why was this particular policy started under Obama? Interested to hear your mental acrobatics.

Let me apply Occam's Razor, a lot of government employees are lazy, so going to the Motel 6 makes sense. Get the names, run some queries, arrest some people, hit my target number, the boss is happy. We have been doing this since 2015, why fix it, if it isn't broken.

Are most of these Canadian visa holed up in the various Motel 6s in the Washington area? I imagine the ICE fished in this area, because it was a good spot to catch fish. In general, I don't think much of the government, but I am sure they have metrics. The local ICE satrap isn't going to keep sending people to Motel 6 if they aren't catching any fish.

What were they doing then? I would love to hear your theory.

Your comment seems to be saying that this is the case here. Otherwise, why invoke Rosa Parks if there is no connection.

I am sure I can find a long list of murderers and rapists that ICE has deported from the country, does opposing ICE mean supporting murderers and rapists?

Why does the fact that someone is staying in Motel 6 need to be admitted as evidence in court? People aren't being deported for the crime of booking a room at Motel 6.

Seems like a solid business plan; better than Lyft or Uber.