Indeed! Who cares about the future of America if I have to pay more for my breakfast cereal?
You only say that because you have enough disposable income to pay more for your breakfast cereal. For those on the edge of starvation, it means starvation. Good job downplaying the importance of the lives of others.
As of about five years ago, roughly 80 million people around the world were "marching toward starvation," as Beasley put it. But that number spiked to 135 million before Covid-19 erupted, largely due to conflict and extreme weather, he said. Now, a staggering 276 million people are at that critical level, including nearly 49 million people in 43 countries that are on the brink of famine, according to the UN.
The very definition of someone not worthy of a reply: Someone who presents transitory (and not nationally unique) inflation as a bigger threat than autocracy.
Maybe ONE day people like this will be embarrassed by their past monumental stupidity and pathetic tribal followership.
Now THAT's optimism!
Naw, as you know, it was just plain ole' stupid !!
Indeed! Who cares about the future of America if I have to pay more for my breakfast cereal?
You only say that because you have enough disposable income to pay more for your breakfast cereal. For those on the edge of starvation, it means starvation. Good job downplaying the importance of the lives of others.
Is Fox News running stories about Americans starving to death due to inflation, or did you come up with this all by yourself ?
Indeed! Who cares about the future of America if I have to pay more for my breakfast cereal?
You only say that because you have enough disposable income to pay more for your breakfast cereal. For those on the edge of starvation, it means starvation. Good job downplaying the importance of the lives of others.
Wow, nice pretend concern you've got going on there!
Pretty sure that the dissolution of the greatest nation on Earth, and the one most essential to the continuance and growth of reasonably well governed nations would cause far more suffering and deaths than current inflation levels. Orders of magnitude more.
But hey, if you are really so concerned about "those on the edge of starvation" I am sure you must be stridently and energetically supporting the programs that help those on the edge, right? Head Start, school lunch programs, low income energy assistance, older Americans nutrition assistance, higher minimum wage, Medicare low income subsidies . . . I mean, isn't that what Republicans stand for above all else - caring for the poor and downtrodden?
Look at the compassion shown by The Man himself (Donald Trump). What does he call these people? Oh yeah, "Losers". Now what could be more compassionate than that?
The very definition of someone not worthy of a reply: Someone who presents transitory (and not nationally unique) inflation as a bigger threat than autocracy.
Maybe ONE day people like this will be embarrassed by their past monumental stupidity and pathetic tribal followership.
"Transitory" 🤣
You're right. Just give the presidency back to that clearly competent and caring DJT, and HE will fix it. Although, he might need to release that health care plan, disarm N. Korea, get Mexico to pay for the non-wall, fix trade, get COVID cases back down to 15, and a few dozen (hundred?) other transparent promises/lies, first. But yeah, it will be good.
OR, of course, give the presidency back to someone else from the party subservient to that same man. Good plan, either way. Good catch.
You only say that because you have enough disposable income to pay more for your breakfast cereal. For those on the edge of starvation, it means starvation. Good job downplaying the importance of the lives of others.
Wow, nice pretend concern you've got going on there!
Pretty sure that the dissolution of the greatest nation on Earth, and the one most essential to the continuance and growth of reasonably well governed nations would cause far more suffering and deaths than current inflation levels. Orders of magnitude more.
But hey, if you are really so concerned about "those on the edge of starvation" I am sure you must be stridently and energetically supporting the programs that help those on the edge, right? Head Start, school lunch programs, low income energy assistance, older Americans nutrition assistance, higher minimum wage, Medicare low income subsidies . . . I mean, isn't that what Republicans stand for above all else - caring for the poor and downtrodden?
Look at the compassion shown by The Man himself (Donald Trump). What does he call these people? Oh yeah, "Losers". Now what could be more compassionate than that?
But it didn't dissolve (just as it didn't the past three times that Democrats tried to block the confirmation process when Republicans were elected). It was political pomp with no substance (much like these hearings). Minimum wage laws actually hurt a lot of the poor and downtrodden, as they create inflation. Head Start is glorified daycare, but at least it keeps kids away from parents that suck at being parents for a while each day. Other low income programs have the unintended consequence of discouraging marriage, which is ultimately more harmful than if the kids were brought up in a more stable household. Democrats don't have the right to complain about energy costs, as their policies do nothing but increase energy costs to consumers. If Democrats did more to decrease energy costs, fewer people would need assistance. Their environmental policies fuel a lot of food inflation as corn gets diverted from food to ethanol production.
Wow, nice pretend concern you've got going on there!
Pretty sure that the dissolution of the greatest nation on Earth, and the one most essential to the continuance and growth of reasonably well governed nations would cause far more suffering and deaths than current inflation levels. Orders of magnitude more.
But hey, if you are really so concerned about "those on the edge of starvation" I am sure you must be stridently and energetically supporting the programs that help those on the edge, right? Head Start, school lunch programs, low income energy assistance, older Americans nutrition assistance, higher minimum wage, Medicare low income subsidies . . . I mean, isn't that what Republicans stand for above all else - caring for the poor and downtrodden?
Look at the compassion shown by The Man himself (Donald Trump). What does he call these people? Oh yeah, "Losers". Now what could be more compassionate than that?
But it didn't dissolve (just as it didn't the past three times that Democrats tried to block the confirmation process when Republicans were elected). It was political pomp with no substance (much like these hearings). Minimum wage laws actually hurt a lot of the poor and downtrodden, as they create inflation. Head Start is glorified daycare, but at least it keeps kids away from parents that suck at being parents for a while each day. Other low income programs have the unintended consequence of discouraging marriage, which is ultimately more harmful than if the kids were brought up in a more stable household. Democrats don't have the right to complain about energy costs, as their policies do nothing but increase energy costs to consumers. If Democrats did more to decrease energy costs, fewer people would need assistance. Their environmental policies fuel a lot of food inflation as corn gets diverted from food to ethanol production.
Don't feel bad. It's not that I am laughing with you. I am laughing directly at you.
I dare you to post the orangeman walking down a ramp.
Make up your mind, either he's too feeble to walk down a ramp or he violently overpowered a secret service agent and grabbed the steering wheel of the limo.
Nobody ever said Trump overpowered anyone. He just thought he could.
Make up your mind, either he's too feeble to walk down a ramp or he violently overpowered a secret service agent and grabbed the steering wheel of the limo.
Nobody ever said Trump overpowered anyone. He just thought he could.
You only say that because you have enough disposable income to pay more for your breakfast cereal. For those on the edge of starvation, it means starvation. Good job downplaying the importance of the lives of others.
Is Fox News running stories about Americans starving to death due to inflation, or did you come up with this all by yourself ?
You are unaware of how many Americans are euphemistically called "food insecure?
From the US Gov:
Food insecure—At times during the year, these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. 10.5 percent (13.8 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2020.
Wow, nice pretend concern you've got going on there!
Pretty sure that the dissolution of the greatest nation on Earth, and the one most essential to the continuance and growth of reasonably well governed nations would cause far more suffering and deaths than current inflation levels. Orders of magnitude more.
But hey, if you are really so concerned about "those on the edge of starvation" I am sure you must be stridently and energetically supporting the programs that help those on the edge, right? Head Start, school lunch programs, low income energy assistance, older Americans nutrition assistance, higher minimum wage, Medicare low income subsidies . . . I mean, isn't that what Republicans stand for above all else - caring for the poor and downtrodden?
Look at the compassion shown by The Man himself (Donald Trump). What does he call these people? Oh yeah, "Losers". Now what could be more compassionate than that?
But it didn't dissolve (just as it didn't the past three times that Democrats tried to block the confirmation process when Republicans were elected). It was political pomp with no substance (much like these hearings). Minimum wage laws actually hurt a lot of the poor and downtrodden, as they create inflation. Head Start is glorified daycare, but at least it keeps kids away from parents that suck at being parents for a while each day. Other low income programs have the unintended consequence of discouraging marriage, which is ultimately more harmful than if the kids were brought up in a more stable household. Democrats don't have the right to complain about energy costs, as their policies do nothing but increase energy costs to consumers. If Democrats did more to decrease energy costs, fewer people would need assistance. Their environmental policies fuel a lot of food inflation as corn gets diverted from food to ethanol production.
The hearings put on one Trump insider and/or Trump-loyal R after another telling the country pretty much exactly what all the "libs" and dreaded MSM have been telling the country for years, and you dismiss it as nothing but "political pomp with no substance."
And they could get DJT himself to testify in confirmation of the same things and you'd STILL say this.
Do you guys ACTUALLY not understand how pathetic and embarrassing it is that you let that man (and his enablers) tell you EXACTLY how to think, no matter HOW counter-factual it is?
Again, feel free to purchase a shred of dignity. And a little ACTUAL respect for your country would be nice, too. You know, the kind with some actual substance - not just a flag on your hat or flying from your pickup truck.
Is Fox News running stories about Americans starving to death due to inflation, or did you come up with this all by yourself ?
You are unaware of how many Americans are euphemistically called "food insecure?
From the US Gov:
Food insecure—At times during the year, these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. 10.5 percent (13.8 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2020.
Your ignorance is appalling.
Oh, we've now moved from "starvation" to "food insecure."
As Real Obvi alluded to, yeah, you guys AREN'T merely Trumpers who will say that up is down all day long in order to keep your world view intact. Oh no, you're deeply concerned about starvation and/or food insecurity amongst downtrodden Americans (caused by recent completely-Biden's-fault inflation, no less). And while distasteful, you know that autocracy is clearly preferable to kids starving in the street.
But it didn't dissolve (just as it didn't the past three times that Democrats tried to block the confirmation process when Republicans were elected). It was political pomp with no substance (much like these hearings). Minimum wage laws actually hurt a lot of the poor and downtrodden, as they create inflation. Head Start is glorified daycare, but at least it keeps kids away from parents that suck at being parents for a while each day. Other low income programs have the unintended consequence of discouraging marriage, which is ultimately more harmful than if the kids were brought up in a more stable household. Democrats don't have the right to complain about energy costs, as their policies do nothing but increase energy costs to consumers. If Democrats did more to decrease energy costs, fewer people would need assistance. Their environmental policies fuel a lot of food inflation as corn gets diverted from food to ethanol production.
The hearings put on one Trump insider and/or Trump-loyal R after another telling the country pretty much exactly what all the "libs" and dreaded MSM have been telling the country for years, and you dismiss it as nothing but "political pomp with no substance."
And they could get DJT himself to testify in confirmation of the same things and you'd STILL say this.
Do you guys ACTUALLY not understand how pathetic and embarrassing it is that you let that man (and his enablers) tell you EXACTLY how to think, no matter HOW counter-factual it is?
Again, feel free to purchase a shred of dignity. And a little ACTUAL respect for your country would be nice, too. You know, the kind with some actual substance - not just a flag on your hat or flying from your pickup truck.
You are unaware of how many Americans are euphemistically called "food insecure?
From the US Gov:
Food insecure—At times during the year, these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. 10.5 percent (13.8 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2020.
Your ignorance is appalling.
Oh, we've now moved from "starvation" to "food insecure."
As Real Obvi alluded to, yeah, you guys AREN'T merely Trumpers who will say that up is down all day long in order to keep your world view intact. Oh no, you're deeply concerned about starvation and/or food insecurity amongst downtrodden Americans (caused by recent completely-Biden's-fault inflation, no less). And while distasteful, you know that autocracy is clearly preferable to kids starving in the street.
Got it.
What do you think food insecure is?
"These households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food."