In memory of my father. He was wounded on the beaches of Iwo Jima and was lucky enough to survive the war.
That hat should be blue.
Cursive writing will become like hierographics in a generation or two as they move toward emojis (like the original cave paintings). The circle of written language.
There is a big difference between wealth and income. Income is money you have coming in. Wealth are your assets. Those assets are only worth what someone else is willing to pay for them.
Most of the wealth for the richest people is in the form of real estate, investments and businesses they own. It isn’t something that can be spent, only sold.
Who are they going to sell those assets to? Should they give away those assets? Who will run the businesses they give away? Who takes possession of the real estate? What happens to the stocks, bonds and other financial assets?
Most of the wealth is acquired over time through appreciation of assets as well as hard work and risk taking in building a business.
Two people making the same income can have very different outcomes over time. One can spend and live pay check to pay check. The other could live more frugally and save and invest in various assets. Over time their wealth differences will be substantial.
Income is the best way to show how someone is doing now. Those with the highest incomes pay a much larger share of the taxes than those with the lowest incomes. Those in the top 50% of income pay almost 97% of the taxes.
Well, for tax year 2017: The top 10% in income paid 70.08% of total income taxes. I guess that means liberals must make up the top earners and are paying the bills for the conservatives who are complaining about all the free stuff they are getting.
So who pays the most in income taxes?
For tax year 2017:Top 5% paid 59.14% of total income taxesBottom 50% paid 3.11%
The top 10% is already paying 70% of the income taxes. I suppose liberals want the “fair” share of the top 10% to be 100% of the income taxes.
“At the beginning of the covid epidemic we did not know if asymptomatic people could transmit the virus. So recommendations were made assuming that they could.”
Assuming something is dangerous. Presenting assumptions as facts is bad science. Making draconian decisions based on an assumption is horrible.
Even climate change can be good for the planet. The earth did much better when it was even warmer than today.
Should the earth continue to warm (and not every scientist agrees that it will) we might have to adjust where we live and farm. That’s the thing, we adjust if it happens. We don’t do what we did with covid and take measures that hurt us now because we might have to adjust later.
Covid has shown us that models do a poor job of predicting. Climate change models have been every bit as bad. In the 60’s we had an ice age coming. 20 years ago we were told the arctic would be almost totally ice free.
I’m sure the earth will get warmer. At some point, it will also get colder. We will adjust.
One thing that will convince me that the oceans will rise significantly is when coastal property values decline significantly. If the ‘big money’ really believed the oceans will rise they would be pulling their money out.
By science, you mean the published study that showed hydroxychloroquine didn’t help and might hurt? The one that was removed from that prestigious publication because it was shown to be using bad data and drawing a bad conclusion? Didn’t hear about that? Maybe you only hear the news your sources want you to hear.
Or maybe the ‘fact’ that we needed to social distance because asymptomatic people could spread covid-19? Of course, now the data shows at the chance of asymptomatic transmission is highly unlikely. Didn’t hear about that either? Again, maybe you only hear the news your sources want you to hear.
Science is good, but it isn’t always correct. There are constant revisions to existing ‘facts’. True science seeks to understand, to challenge existing understanding. It doesn’t preach.
Is ‘real’ news only what you observe? Is it possible that there might be something that exists that you don’t see, or maybe turn a blind eye to.
My son and his wife do see a lot of liberal bias at the universities where they are professors. They see professors ‘teaching’ values along with the subject matter.
They also see good professors that want students to learn how to think for themselves rather than being taught what to think.
My son and Daughter-in-law both teach at the college level. They know that way too many professors feel it is more important to indoctrinate than to educate.