While you're correct about the house vote for the take it down act, the senate did not vote unanimously to confirm all of trump's appointees. Still way to many dems did vote to confirm them, as that number should've been 0 for all of them, but it was nowhere near unanimous passing either.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-vote-trump-cabinet-picks-top-nominees/
Yes, but only for already wealthy corporations.
Ah, ok, thank you for confirming I didn't just black out a big chunk of that episode or something, cuz I read Steve Castle in your comment and I was like...who the fuck is that? He had a name??
As a side note, how'd you know that 80's business guys name was Steve Castle? I feel like he was only ever referred to as "that guy"?
If you're gonna be so aggressively prudish to consider this "adult content", at least don't be so whiny.
Albanese is superior to every gummy brand.
He claimed he has "nothing" except for two houses, which he claimed are in the process of being liquidated, and a truck.
Motherfucker owning multiple houses crying about how he has "nothing". Fucking hell. But I guess if they're being liquidated he should have the funds to pay his fine pretty soon, right? Right?
Wait'll he finds out how much taxpayer money is spent on Trump golfing! He will be livid, no doubt!
In general, recipients of UBI end up in better employment positions than they had before receiving UBI. That means they pay more in taxes and contribute more to society. They also are in better health, which means those that were truly poor and on medicaid before, are no longer costing society as much in medical costs.
But keep licking that boot.
You know why governments exist? Like, at their core? To take care of the fucking people living under them. It's why village A stopped attacking village B, cuz they realized that, if they pooled their resources, they could defend against the fucking leopards and bears better. So yes, your taxes would go up. But you know what? Unless you're actually rich, and not even like net worth of 3 million dollars or something, that ain't even rich, but unless you're RICH rich, you'll get more throught that "handout" than you would pay in taxes. And the fact that it'd be funded through your taxes means it's not even a handout to begin with! It's a government SERVICE. The thing that made banding together in groups of more than a dozen people sound like a good idea in the first place.
Now, as for your point of having a lot of money not obligating you to support bums... well, first. Fuck you. You're an asshole. And second, 50% of homeless people in the US are former foster kids that aged out of the system and have no support network. So I guess just fuck them, they get to die on the streets, right? Bad luck to not be born with wealthy parents. And historically, having a lot of money DID mean you had an obligation to support these so called "bums". From the '40s to 1963, the top tax rates were ~90%. On the ultra wealthy. The Rockefellers and whatnots. Now it's what? I dunno, 30%? That is, if you don't use creative accounting and just make it .01%, which we all know is the typical practice. It's not a handout, it's making these rich beyond rich fucking assholes pay their fair share. But you can keep licking that boot, because, sure. Someday, YOU'LL make it. And when you have more money than you can possibly use in your great grandchildren's lifetimes, it'll be really important to you to keep some just turned 18 year old kid, who bounced around the foster system his whole life, and has no support system at all, out of housing. Good for you.
You know, you'd get it too. The population is the beneficiary. The subsidizer would be people like Musk and Dorsey. by taxing them.
It changed his glasses. And the word "center" in the background changed to city, or maybe gity? And his beer no longer has a lid. And what is going on with his headphone cords?? Not very exactly the same in the details...