Conservatives will come back, they always do. This country is founded on liberalism and freedom and both of the major parties are as well. Conservatism is a parasitic ideology that moves from one party to other and causes it to be sick for long periods of time. Eventually, the party rids itself and comes back inline with its origins and the parasite moves to the other party.
You're going to love our new country. so diverse, so vibrant. Sand Francisco could be its new capital.
Probably, massive election fraud in a scale not yet, seen! When Republicans hold majorities in their areas, how can the Democrats defeat and sweep all Republicans from their areas? Hell, your chances at that is probably, even worst than trying to hit the Powerball and Mega Millions jackpots! Only, outright fraud thru absentee and provisional ballots appearing late? Absentee ballots if you are not aware of it are sent in before the elections so, how can there be late absentee ballots? If you mail it late, it becomes null and void according to the law anyways! Republicans never bothered to even launch an investigation. Atleast, compare the total registered voters with the votes actually cast! If the votes cast is way more then, there is probably, a lot of ballot stuffing that happened!
I see, the ills of the world are Thomas Jefferson’s fault. Drug use is a liberal thing despite the heroine epidemic hitting disproportionately rural areas thanks loose pharmaceutical regulations. Let’s not forget about the homeless and vilianize them too, despite veterans making up an unusually high percentage. Nice job with that one buddy. It’s easy to sit behind a screen and complain, real life is dirty. Actually going out and talking to drug addicts and the homeless isn’t en vogue in the “evangelical” community since Trump. Nah, you guys like your Christianity with a side of chic-Fil-A sauce now of days.
You miss the point entirely. We are quickly turning into a third world country. You act like it is just some sort of random chance event. We can't take care of our own citizens, but your crowd wants to let in an army of no-skill third world immigrants. Most will end up on welfare or in prison. That is just a fact. Look after our own citizens first. If you have a hole in your roof and water is pouring in, you fix the hole first, then worry about the carpet. You want to make the hole bigger.
Now if you are homeless in San Fran, the tech companies have to give you money. San Francisco’s Biggest Companies To Pay ‘Homeless Tax,’ A Measure That Had Tech Leaders Butting Heads https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/14/homeless-tax-san-francisco-proposition-c-benioff/
WALL STREET JOURNAL The global carbon tax revolt: France protests latest in growing movementWSJ EDITORIAL BOARD Yellow vests protesters block the road leading to the Frontignan oil depot in the south of France, as they demonstrate against the rise in fuel prices. Picture: AFP THE WALL STREET JOURNAL 2:05PM DECEMBER 4, 2018 98 Facebook Twitter Email France’s violent Yellow Vest protests are now about many domestic concerns, but it’s no accident that the trigger was a fuel-tax hike. Nothing reveals the disconnect between ordinary voters and an aloof political class more than carbon taxation. The fault line runs between anti-carbon policies and economic growth, and France is a test for the political future of emissions restrictions. France already is a relatively low-carbon economy, with per-capita emissions half Germany’s as of 2014. French governments have nonetheless pursued an “ecological transition” to further squeeze carbon emissions from every corner of the French economy. The results are visible in the Paris streets. President Emmanuel Macron and his Socialist predecessor François Hollande targeted auto emissions because they account for about 40 per cent of France’s carbon emissions from fuel combustion compared to 21 per cent in Germany. But this is mainly because France relies heavily on nuclear power for electricity. Power generation and heating account for only 13 per cent of French emissions, compared to 44 per cent across the Rhine. French road-transport emissions were a mere 0.4 per cent of global carbon emissions in 2016, when overall French emissions were less than 1 per cent. Yet Paris insists on cutting more, though transport emissions are notoriously hard to reduce. Cleaner engines or affordable hybrids have been slow to emerge. Undeterred, Mr Macron pushed ahead with a series of punitive tax hikes to discourage driving. The protesters in Paris will be expected to pay much of the up to 8 billion euro annual tab for a minuscule global benefit — that’s how much tax revenue Mr Macron thinks his levies will raise. This is preposterous in an economy that still has an 8.9 per cent jobless rate (21.5 per cent for the young) and will struggle to hit 2 per cent annual GDP growth. French President Emmanuel Macron. Picture: AFP Yellow Vests from less prosperous rural areas, who depend on cars for daily life, know it. They’re insulted when Mr Macron tells them to wait for better public transport or to carpool — yes, he really said that. They also assume that Paris will waste a fuel-tax windfall on boondoggles such as unreliable renewable power to replace zero-emissions nuclear plants. The carbon tax revolt is world-wide. Voters in Washington state last month rejected a carbon tax that would have started at $15 per ton of emissions and climbed $2 a year indefinitely. Washington ranks 25th among American states in carbon emissions and when we tried to estimate its contribution to global emissions our calculator couldn’t handle a number that small. Gov. Jay Inslee and green activists nonetheless wanted voters to pay $2.3 billion in taxes over five years. Ontario province in Canada is suing to block a federal carbon tax, and the issue could topple the Alberta government and perhaps Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Ontario Attorney-General Caroline Mulroney warned that the federal tax grab “takes money from families’ pockets and makes job creators less competitive.” German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Energiewende — a transition to renewables that has increased dirty coal emissions and caused household energy costs to soar — has become a political liability. A carbon tax is in theory a more efficient way than regulation to reduce carbon emissions. But after decades of global conferences, forests of reports, dire television documentaries, celebrity appeals, school-curriculum overhauls and media bludgeoning, voters don’t believe that climate change justifies policies that would raise their cost of living and hurt the economy. WSJ
First thing is you misunderstand most Democrats position on immigration. Second thing is without immigration we are screwed. Now as far as allowing an army of unskilled migrants into our country, again the only thing democrats are calling for - if you actually listen - is simply following the rule of law. If I was you I would look inward because you are frustrating yourself thinking Democrats are going to be brow beaten onto your side of things and support draconian immigration policy and not fight for legal status for those here. There’s an old Roman saying that goes something like, you can call a cat a fish but you can’t make it swim. Democrats take government seriously, unlike republicans, they will look to compromise on immigration for legal status. If the republicans actually want to get something done and increase security and have smart reforms then the time is now. But let me be totally clear on this, immigration is not a cause of major decline in America. Republican economic policies are. George H. W. told everyone Reagan and the like were pushing some very dangerous economic policies that would ruin our country and without fail it’s lead to greater and greater inequality and deficits. Cutting taxes is a gimmick that is not an economic policy. Waging war on unions decreases all wage earners incomes. Not having a universal healthcare system has created an unaffordable healthcare system. These are the issues all Americans need to get on the right side of.
Paris riots show difficulty of fighting warming with taxes https://www.wral.com/paris-riots-show-difficulty-of-fighting-warming-with-taxes/18043699/ PARIS — The "yellow vests" in France are worrying greens around the world. The worst riots in Paris in decades were sparked by higher fuel taxes, and French President Emmanuel Macron responded by scrapping them Wednesday. But taxes on fossil fuels are just what international climate negotiators, meeting in Poland this week, say are desperately needed to help wean the world off of fossil fuels and slow climate change. "The events of the last few days in Paris have made me regard the challenges as even greater than I thought earlier," said Stanford University environmental economist Lawrence Goulder, author of the book "Confronting the Climate Challenge." Economists, policymakers and politicians have long said the best way to fight climate change is to put a higher price on the fuels that are causing it — gasoline, diesel, coal and natural gas. Taxing fuels and electricity could help pay for the damage they cause, encourage people to use less, and make it easier for cleaner alternatives and fuel-saving technologies to compete. These so-called carbon taxes are expected to be a major part of pushing the world to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and try to prevent runaway climate change that economists say would be far more expensive over the long term than paying more for energy in the short term. But it's not so easy for people to think about long-term, global problems when they are struggling to get by. Macron said the higher tax was his way of trying to prevent the end of the world. But the yellow vest protesters turned that around with the slogan: "it's hard to talk about the end of the world while we are talking about the end of the month." The resistance to the fuel tax is a personal blow to Macron, who sees himself as the guarantor of the 2015 Paris climate accord, its strongest defender on the global stage. He has positioned himself as the anti-Trump when it comes to climate issues. The French government quietly fears a Trump-led backlash against the accord could spread to other major economies whose commitment is essential to keeping the deal together. The fuel tax was not originally Macron's idea; it dates back to previous administrations. But he vigorously defended it and won the presidency in part on a promise to fight climate change. So what went wrong? Yale University economist William Nordhaus, who won this year's Nobel prize for economics, said the tax was poorly designed and was delivered by the wrong person. "If you want to make energy taxes unpopular, step one is to be an unpopular leader," he said. "Step two is to use gasoline taxes and call them carbon taxes. This is hard enough without adding poor design." Macron, like French presidents before him, made environmental and energy decisions without explaining to the public how important they are and how their lives will change. He's also seen as the "president of the rich" — his first fiscal decision as president was scrapping a wealth tax. So hiking taxes on gasoline and diesel was seen as especially unfair to the working classes in the provinces who need cars to get to work and whose incomes have stagnated for years. The French government already has programs in place to subsidize drivers who trade in older, dirtier cars for cleaner ones, and expanded them in an attempt to head off the protests last month. But for many French, it was too little, too late. The French reaction to higher fuel prices is hardly unique, which highlights just how hard it can be to discourage fossil fuel consumption by making people pay more. In September, protests in India over high gasoline prices shut down schools and government offices. Protests erupted in Mexico in 2017 after government deregulation caused a spike in gasoline prices, and in Indonesia in 2013 when the government reduced fuel subsidies and prices rose. In the United States, Washington state voters handily defeated a carbon tax in November. "Higher taxes on fuel have always been a policy more popular among economists than among voters," said Greg Mankiw, a Harvard economist and former adviser to President George W. Bush. Even proponents of carbon taxes acknowledge that they can disproportionally hurt low-income people. Energy costs make up a larger portion of their overall expenses, so a fuel price increase eats up more of their paycheck and leaves them with less to spend. And because energy costs are almost impossible to avoid, they feel trapped. It is also not lost on them that it is the rich, unbothered by fuel taxes, who are hardest on the environment because they travel and consume more. "The mistake of the Macron government was not to marry the increase in fuel taxes with other sufficiently compelling initiatives promising to enhance the welfare and incomes of the 'yellow vests,' said Barry Eichengreen, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley. Now the question is "How can we address the climate problem while also avoiding producing political upheaval," Goulder said. The key is giving a good chunk of money back to the people, Wesleyan University environmental economist Gary Yohe said. Many economists back proposals that would tax carbon, but then use that money to offer tax rebates or credits that would benefit lower-income families. The protests, while sparked by fuel prices, are also about income inequality, populism and anti-elitism, experts say, not just about carbon taxes. "Is it a death knell for the carbon tax or pricing carbon? I don't think so," economist Yohe said. "It is just a call for being a little bit more careful about how you design the damn thing."