BaldManGoomba

49 years between 2000-2050. 25 would be the mid point with 24 years previous and 24 years to go. 182nd day of the year is July 1st so July 2nd is the middle point/day of the year with leap years being midnight of July 2nd into July 3rd. So this checks out

As a white person.

Justice can not be served for black people or other racial minorities if we pull up the wealth ladder and tax them as they get money. The system was racist and allowed white people to get ahead if you tax everyone equally who do you harm the poorer and newer wealthy people. If you don't take from a subset of the population you harm

We had a racist system that allowed wealth to go to white people. We eliminated the slave labor 164 years ago and tradition of viewing and treating other races as less than(in theory 61 years ago). But the white already wealthy people already own everything and have generational wealth. We have not had a thing that helped black people specifically. They were suppose to get 40 acres and a mule. A generation hasn't even passed of being able to discriminate against races.

If you pull up the ladder of wealth you are only hurting new wealth which would be proportionally more black people versus targeting old wealth which would proportionally be white people.

Lastly Mamdani said he was describing the neighborhood he was targeting with his changes to taxing. He wasn't going to put language into law that it had to be white people.

The only access to them is media in the backroom or private event held by rich asking what do you think of protests on main street because you can't get close to their property and if you can they are probably in another house

Democrats have always been like that so DINO doesn't make sense. Progressive is the only label that aligns with good politics these days

Because they have always been win. Evil never sleeps and it will always exist. Good people have to fight every day to make progress. Perfect example is Bernie sanders and democrats. Bernie has been fighting since the 70s. Democrats have been it is good enough things are fine just defend the status quo. Meanwhile people are working everyday to setup bad things with currently things reaching back as far as Clinton and people can argue Reagan.

Evil never sleeps and is constantly working to undermine peace. Lots of people are honestly mediocre or middle of the road once things are good enough they stop fighting. There has only ever been a few good people fighting. People deep in community actively doing good things.

So if we had a truly progressive party in power conservatives job would be saying can we afford this, what would the impacts be, why do we need to do this thing, why is the status quo not good etc etc. Then they are suppose to listen to reason, trial out big changes, adapt, and let the future go forward making sure the small man and traditionalists aren't left behind.

Instead conservatives are about changing the climate, culture, and environment to hurt others or hold back common sense things that make people equal.

You process food by washing, cutting, or cooking your food. Processed isn't being used properly to scaremonge people. Over processed or ultra processed food is the worriesome stuff

If you get paid more you can parrot the talking point that you are more valuable and work harder that is why you are compensated more. Or point out you have more leverage at your job because it is more valuable that is why you get more days off.

I dont know if this is true but the rumor is the data resembles vote switch that putin does with machines

https://youtu.be/QDWwLDejg8Y

Why not both? People are motivated or get things in different ways sometimes I just need the command other times I need to understand why. As for titles of sections the funny or longer chapter lines I might remember better than the simple one.

Personally I think it does as the institutional and mainstream answer is completely unacceptable. To have so many waver or not want to answer is pretty telling/meaningful. IMO

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bLmjKzZ43eLIxZb1Bt9iNAo8ZAZ01Huy/htmlview

The actual Emerson college survey has it at 58.7% of the people find the shooters actions as completely unacceptable. True 16.5% find it completely or somewhat acceptable. Lots of neutral and unsure at 15.9% and somewhat unacceptable at 9%.

BTW this poll isn't perfectly accurate in who they sampled as 37% south,17.7% northeast , 52% women, 18% post doc, 24% college grad,also so many old people versus young. The demographics aren't properly proportional.

That being said best insights we have polling though may be a way of the past