On 11/6/24 7:19 PM, pothead wrote:
> On 2024-11-06, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>> On 11/6/24 10:58 AM, pothead wrote:
>>> On 2024-11-06, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/5/24 9:15 AM, pothead wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-11-05, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/4/24 5:01 PM, pothead wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-11-04, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/3/24 9:25 AM, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <6726f4e0$0$2385543$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>>>>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 2, 2024 at 8:03:34 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>>>>>> <qopdijd7ms9h2tqgjbah19l27picjvdhg2@4ax.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> L>>>> On 02 Nov 2024 19:59:03 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep going off topic. Why not respond to the content, other than the
>>>>>>>>>>>> reason you have already given -- you are a coward. The media was focused on
>>>>>>>>>>>> the senility of the candidates... now when there is only one senile old man
>>>>>>>>>>>> who clearly has lost his ability to understand what is going on around him
>>>>>>>>>>>> they have dropped that. Why do you think that is?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nearly a third of Georgia's registered voters have voted already by early or
>>>>>>>>>>> mail.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <shrug>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Trump will win. Harris has just not shown the decisiveness, the *ownership* of
>>>>>>>>>>> the office.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I fear you might be correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> NP: Atlanta Rhythm Section - Georgia Rhythm
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWRuhsWmSWY>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you have a safe spot picked out? Or will you just enjoy the lower
>>>>>>>>> prices and closed border?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, the border would have been restricted to just 5,000/month if Trump
>>>>>>>> hadn't ordered the bipartisan border deal legislation to be killed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On prices, if the CPI goes down without a recession, I'll send you $100:
>>>>>>>> care to show your sincerity by reciprocating the upside on this wager?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -hh
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No bill needed.
>>>>>>> Just reinstate the Trump policies that Biden/Harris rescinded on day one,...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just which Trump policy has survived Court rulings to make it legal?
>>>>>> Go ahead and list them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... continue
>>>>>>> building the wall and add to it additional high tech monitoring and all
>>>>>>> would be fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you're willing to pay how much more in income taxes to pay for what
>>>>>> you want? Put up a number.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why did Biden/Harris/Majorkas claim for 3.5 years that the border was secure?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because CBP encounters were way up. CBP also reported that a lot of the
>>>>>> apprehensions were repeats ... the same guy, again & again. I could
>>>>>> look up the numbers, but my recollection is that something like 75% were
>>>>>> repeats.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/4455506-breaking-down-the-senate-border-bill-and-why-it-has-no-chance-of-passing/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No chance of passing isn't the same as saying if it would start to fix
>>>>>> the immigration problems or not. Try again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -hh
>>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting that a libby is all of a sudden interested in policies being legal.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, you'll find me stating "Rule of Law" many times in the archives.
>>>> Case in point, here's one from over a decade ago:
>>>>
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.linux.advocacy/c/6iliw4eou5o/m/0fV_yx55dWsJ>
>>>>
>>>>> Were you singing the same tune when Biden ignored the courts to find
>>>>> a method to forgive student loans?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only comment I've made on that subject was to fact-check chrisv a year
>>>> ago: he incorrectly claim that lost interest went to taxpayers. It
>>>> doesn't: it goes to the banks servicing the loans.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Anyway the main policies such as:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Remain in Mexico
>>>>> 2. No catch and release in US.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for legal challenges, remain in Mexico was ended by Biden, challenged in SCOTUS
>>>>> who ruled in Biden's favor to end the policy however it was blocked by a federal judge
>>>>> who ruled Biden did not have the authority to end the program.
>>>>>
>>>>> Either way, it was working.
>>>>
>>>> Except that the Judiciary Branch said it wasn't legal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Instead of churning numbers, which suck BTW, why not read what the states and border
>>>>> patrol think of Joe Biden and his open border.
>>>>
>>>> Before Trump spoke up, CPB was in favor of the 2024 Bipartisan Bill.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It's a disaster that his administration, including Harris, created and are 100% responsible
>>>>> for.
>>>>
>>>> Immigration has been a political football for longer than Biden has been
>>>> alive. And only a dishonest partisan blames the Executive Branch when
>>>> the Judicial Branch concludes that a policy is unconstitutional.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -hh
>>>>
>>> It hasn't been a political football nor a problem prior to Biden taking office
>>
>>
>> Bull Shit.
>>
>> Trump, 2016: "Migrant Caravans!"
>
> So?
> He was correct.

So how many were there actually? Because there's always been emigration
to the USA, so numbers matter. Similarly, was it more or less than in
the past? If you can't answer these, then you're not being objective.

> He was also correct when he stated that we are not getting the brightest and best
> coming into our country.
> Fact.

And is that a change?

>>> and turning that problem into at least 21 million migrants into the US which
>>> is unprecedented.
>>
>>
>> As I asked chrisv (which he "snipped unread" on):
>> just what is the problem with having these immigrants? Be specific.
>
> Huh?
> They are unvetted.

And that's the _only_ reason? Because if that were really true, the
Dreamers would have all been given citizenship a decade ago.

> We have no idea who these people are, what their past is and why they want to
> come here.

Most arrivals today are filling out applications.
Why are we sitting on the paperwork for 3+ years before reviewing them?

> You sure don't sound like a military person.
> Perhaps a civie?

So? You don't sound like a college graduate that you've claimed to be.
Perhaps its because your claim was of having just a BSEE.

> LEGAL MIGRATION is the answer.
> Stand in line like millions of others have for centuries.

Oh, like in the "good old days"?

History lesson: in the past, there was no line, and no quota.
It was a few hours in Ellis Island, and that was it.

The only way one got detained was if you were obviously sick, and then
you were allowed to stay, in quarantine, until well and then you were
allowed in.

> And yes, the system needs a major overhaul.
> It really does.

Sure does ... but then how does this square with Trump opposing the
bipartisan bill to make improvements earlier this year?

>> And reconcile it with what I've already said, including how the The
>> Idaho Dairymen’s Association estimated that 89% of their state’s on-site
>> dairy workers are foreign-born: do you have enough of an education on
>> Supply & Demand to have a clue for what will happen to the availability
>> and price of milk if 9 out of 10 workers get deported?
>
> Fine.
> Let them apply legally.

Has that suggestion worked out for the Dreamers?
No, it has not.

Our poor treatment of them has trashed our reputation of fair & just
treatment, so why should other immigrants trust us?

There's zero upside for them.

So what commitment are we going to make for this "apply legally" bit?
Will they be guaranteed to continue to stay & work? Will they be
guaranteed citizenship within 5 years?

How will we avoid having another Dreamers fiasco of a trap, where
applicants are disincentivized, because they know that the US knows who
& where they are?

Because we know Trump's policy is immediate deportation, no exceptions.
That's hurtful, and expensive for taxpayers & economically inflationary.

> Nobody is claiming migrants are bad, ...

But that is precisely what you're saying through innuendo, such as the
"See NYC" that you wrote below.

> ... they buiit America however it needs to be controlled.

So why weren't you upset at Trump when he killed making bipartisan
improvements for better control ... earlier this year?

> Just letting anyone in who manages to answer the questions on an iPhone app
> is absolutely crazy.
>
> See NYC for details and many examples.

This vague hand-waiving is innuendo of "migrants are bad."

So then, these NYC examples...they are of just what, precisely?
Be specific.

>> Or is economics another subject you flunked, along with Engineering?
>
> Wrong.
> I earned a BSEE with a minor in physics.
> So essentially 2 degrees.

No, having a minor isn't like (essentially) having two degrees: it
merely indicates a field of specialization within the major.

You clearly never advanced to review resumes of job applicants.

> Graduated with a 3.7 GPA, yea I was a bit lazy back then.
> I had a job 3 months before I graduated.
> Oh yea, all while working to pay my way through college because at the time I was
> the wrong color to get free money. And that's basically what the University told me.
> Next.

So we are to believe that it all worked out for you to have a successful
career ... yet you're still holding on to old racist anger from decades
ago, when tuition was cheap and a summer job could pay for it.

>>> Biden/Harris own this mess.
>>
>>
>> Of these alleged 21 million migrants, just how many of them were already
>> in the USA before 2021? Cite your sources.
>
> Who cares?
> If they are here illegally they are criminals.

Because your petty partisanship attempts are stupid because it is making
what's pragmatically almost a non-issue into a false problem, which
squanders taxpayers dollars...an inefficient use.

For the DHS has estimated illegal entries at just ~660,000/yr, which is
a rate decline of 70% over the past 20 years:

<https://usafacts.org/articles/what-can-the-data-tell-us-about-unauthorized-immigration/>

Which means that the "its all Harris/Biden's fault!" claim is clearly
false, because (21M - 4*660K)/21M = 87% of the illegal immigrants
"problem" were already present in the USA before Biden's term.

During that time, there's been essentially zero acts of terrorism
committed by them, elementary school shootings, etc ... and FBI crime
statistics have shown that they're more law-abiding than US citizens.

So once again ... just what _really_ is the problem?
Other than them not being white, of course! /s

>>> And when terrorists or bad actors in general start their attacks from within the US
>>> Biden and Harris will own that coming disaster as well.
>>
>>
>> As opposed to Russia putting bombs in Western cargo aircraft last week?
>
> Under Biden.

Caught & prevented under Biden.

> Didn't happen under Trump.
> In fact the world was at peace under Trump.

Unfortunately, the world wasn't at peace under Trump.

>>> It's not a matter of if but when.
>>> And, sadly, it will make October 7th look like a day at Disney in comparison.
>>>
>>
>> Oh but didn't you hear? Solving all wars is "easy" and will be done
>> within 48 hours after he assumes office ...
>
> Trying to solve the war problem even if failing is far better than having a policy of appeasement
> which does nothing but increase the likelihood of wars in the first place.

Except that Trump's appeasement didn't actually work. Just like how
Chamberlain failed, a weaker Ukraine helped Russia to invade further
into Ukraine. Likewise, despite Trump's Abraham Accords, Hamas still
attacked Israel on Oct 7th (Putin's birthday, BTW),

> See Joe Biden for that one.

There's more going on than what's made to the public. The West is in a
tough spot, trying to keep a particular balance. I personally have zero
faith in Trump not fucking it up.

>> ... right after the Healthcare & Infrastructure plans are published from
>> their 2021 due dates, of course. /s
>
> Infrastucture I will give you as something needs to be done, however the Biden
> Infrastructure bill is a train wreck.

And of course, you'll claim its because of DEI requirements within, even
though hundreds of projects have taken the money in that deal.

> As for health care, it depends.
> Obama care has been a disaster for most.
> If not for RINO McCain it would have been gone under Trump.
The "disaster" was for investors, because Pharma/Healthcare stock prices
didn't appreciate as much as they could have without ACA regulations.

But yes, consumers are still being ripped off in US healthcare, from the
things which the ACA didn't fix, namely:

(1) high drug prices - pharma middlemen & Medicare restrictions;
(2) services consolidations - monopsony against healthcare workers;
(3) private equity - reductions in beds > crowded ERs, etc.

> Personally, I find it appalling that the US does not take care of it's seniors and
> citizens, at least the legal ones, medically.
> Socialized medicine is not the answer but something does need to be done.

I'd hope that it could be done within a public/private structure, but
there are problems with the status quo. For example, a huge flaw in the
ACA is on digital records in that there was no open data requirement.
The result is that private healthcare insurance providers have built
data silos, where *our* medical data has become *their* proprietary data
for its profit potential against their competitors.

This hurts patient care because because our medical records aren't
visible across all providers...an Aetna practice can only see the
medical records entered by other Aetna members, so its incomplete.

>> So just like I said to Skeeter:
>>
>> "On prices, if the CPI goes down without a recession, I'll send you
>> $100: care to show your sincerity by reciprocating the upside on this
>> wager?"
>
> It's all about "lived economics", meaning how the economic situation of the country
> affects the average person each day.
> ie: food, mortgage, fuel, heating etc.

So which of these isn't covered by tracking metrics such as the CPI-U?

>> I'm now making the same offer to you too, Pothead.
>
> I don't need your $100.

That wasn't the point. The point was that I'm sufficiently confident in
to give you *free money* if I'm wrong, with no strings attached.

That you're not willing to reciprocate in kind shows us that you know
that Trump's promise to decrease prices is 100% bullshit.

> And I don't give a shit about your indicators and neither does anyone else
> paying 20% or more for groceries than they did in 2020 under Trump.
>
> Even Biden tried the Bidenomics is working routine early in his campaign and
> his staff told him to knock it off because the people were not buying it.

And Trump's tax hike on 90% of Americans is going to make them better?

>> So how about it, Pothead? Do you actually believe in what you say to be
>> willing to put IRL money where your mouth is and offer a reciprocation?
>
> Nope.
> I'm not getting in the middle of your wars.

You're not willing to reciprocate in kind because you damn well know
that the inflation bit & Trump's promise to fix it is 100% bullshit.

> Biden/Harris screwed the entire country into the ground. If Trump can fix it, great.
> If he can't, it's time to move on to another plan.

Such as Elon's suggestion to deliberately crash the US into a recession.
Be careful what you've wished for.

>
>> Or will you be another coward and dodge, like Skeeter already has?
>> -hh
>
> Cut the juvenile crap already.
> Please.

Sure: all you need to do is to start being honest with yourself, and
with us.

-hh