I would caution you about socialism being a way to get to communism.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the founders of communist ideology, believed democratic socialism was a sham and true communism could only be achieved through a violent overthrow of the bourgeois.

The complex restructuring you mentioned is why they thought a transition from socialism to communism would not work.

Source: https://www.stephenhicks.org/2013/02/18/marxs-philosophy-and-the-necessity-of-violent-politics/

This is for a vote conducted back in October. I wonder what a more recent one looks like and if there has been any change.

It blows my mind that New Horizons flew by years ago and sent so much data that scientists are still discovering new information regarding Pluto.

250 billion for what? Governments are horribly inefficient and many of their employees operate with the thought “not my money not my problem I can just spend it however I want”

Billionaires getting taxed more only treats a symptom and not the root cause. Their corporations should be broken up, competition should be stimulated, shareholders should demand limits on exec bonuses and the executive pay should be limited to a reasonable ratio of exec to lowest paid employee pay.

That would make things better and money in the government should be spent more appropriately.

Well it’s international airspace and nations can fly whatever they want inside international airspace regardless of the proximity to a nation.

Russians do it to Canada and the United States often but it doesn’t make much fanfare because the parties involved handle it professionally

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/russian-bombers-buzz-canadian-airspace-1.5447833

https://www.stripes.com/branches/air_force/2022-10-18/russian-bombers-alaska-american-jets-7735230.html

Emotional responses don’t lead to any solutions. Only reason will create a peaceful two state solution.

Was there a reason all of Rhode Island is in the picture but not in the data set?

Should billionaires make as much as they do? No

However just taxing them doesn’t get rid of the root issue. It just addresses a symptom.

We should break up the companies that enable billionaires to exist, stimulate competition, raise the minimum wage, put bounds on CEO bonuses, and limit executive pay to a reasonable ratio when compared to the lowest paid worker in the corporation.

Why is it assumed that if the government has more money, then things will be better?

The government is filled with inefficiency that will just be made worse by throwing more money at the issue. Americans are not getting value out of their taxes.

Americans have record low confidence in congress and many officials in government (Supreme Court). Why would we give them more money when they, congress in particular, is responsible for setting the budget?

Well he was the first senator, in the history of the US, to vote for impeachment of a sitting President in the same party.

https://www.vox.com/2020/2/5/21125118/mitt-romney-impeachment-vote-history

Other than that, I am not well versed on his history enough to make comment.

Bitwarden for sure! It is certainly the easiest way to increase security on all your accounts by making extremely secure passwords. Plus you can self host it if you want!

Really don’t agree with this one. We have a broken system that the leading candidates in each party refuse to debate other contenders. Our “candidates” have been selected for us before the election has even gotten close.

Biden is too old and just a career politician that got to this point not because he was the right choice but because he got the right jobs. He had been vying for the presidency for at least 20 years before he got it. It just became his turn.

Additionally, he is not progressive just a populist. Just ask the railroad works that were told they can’t strike because of a bill signed by Biden.

More information is here on some of the falsehoods of Biden being progressive when it relates to unions: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/02/joe-biden-is-no-friend-of-unions

One thing I think people keep missing is that the entire military still is operating with no detriment. They still have people filling positions and acting with the authorities the position holds.

This inconvenience doesn’t impact day to day operations.

Senators should have this ability to hold things up. If we make the statement they can’t then we open ourselves up for ridicule when the situation is reversed.

Certainly true.

Right now we have a military that serves the interests of the industrial complex and not the other way around.

In WWII it wasn’t that way. The government did not have companies that it would be seduced into paying more than a fair value for military equipment

Is that a Firefox issue or Google making proprietary standards that only work with chromium based browsers?

I think Google is trying to be anti competitive. I have noticed similar issues when using Firefox with Google Docs.

Take a look at what a former Mozilla exec had to say on the issue: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has-sabotaged-firefox-for-years/

Well we are also not other countries. We have different culture, socio economic makeup, different population distribution, and different history. Something that works in another country isn’t guaranteed to work here.

I think a key reason why nothing will ever change is because moderates offer “hey we can do mental health checks, bans on ownership for people convicted of violent crimes, and mandatory wait times” to meet in the middle and compromise but both sides don’t want to do that.

Just a symptom of how polarized the nation is. Until we fix that, nothing will ever change.

Well that is just one individual out of millions. Just because you don’t see a need doesn’t mean others don’t. Plus us as individuals can’t determine what other large groups can and cannot have. We don’t have the same life experiences.

Someone may be the victim of a sexual assault and when living in a rural area having something to defend themselves gives them some peace of mind.

Imagine living in a small neighborhood where everyone knows everyone and you don’t get along with a corrupt police force. When you are in danger from someone during a home invasion or if you are hiking in the wilderness, you may not trust the cops to act in your best interest

You implied that if we kept New Horizons going, that we would get more Pluto pics. I would love for that to happen however it is physically impossible for New Horizons to turn around to see Pluto. It simply doesn’t have enough fuel to negate its over 10,000 mph (16,000 kph for you metric folks) speed relative to the sun and then accelerate to that same speed in the opposite direction.

The only place New Horizons is ever going is beyond our solar system which has tons of cool science involved by studying solar winds near the heliopause but unfortunately no cool pictures. Also, I am not a scientist but I am not sure what data gained from solar winds study would be new compared to what was already provided by Voyager 1 and 2.

If shutting down New Horizons means costs savings that allow a new probe to be sent to orbit either Uranus or Neptune, which haven’t been visited in decades, I am all for shutting down New Horizons.

What the author used as their title is not the most ideal however the main point is the benefits buying has over renting.

However I understand that people can’t afford a down payment on a house in major cities.

Out where I live houses can go for 100-200k so it is more achievable for those of more modest income.

Obviously I never intended to put people down because they don’t make 200k+ a year.

True but in this case it’s not populace deciding to make the food import ban, it’s the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). They are using this opportunity to create a impact on Japan’s economy which is already struggling under the strain of inflation the country hasn’t experienced in decades.

It is just political posturing and nothing else. Not out of concern for the Chinese people.