Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

the problem is this, okay:

Biden's response, and your responses, are effectively solidifying Russian's status as a terrorist state no different from ISIS (etc) despite its place in history.

That's not what's happening at all.

[Breccia]

Saying

despite its place in history.

is like saying "Your Honor, my client wasn't a murderer until he killed those people on purpose". It was a pointless and irrelevant detail to add, and I suspect it was only done to try to defend Russia.

[Strange One]

the problem is this, okay:

Biden's response, and your responses, are effectively solidifying Russian's status as a terrorist state no different from ISIS (etc) despite its place in history.

You come across here as an ISIS supporter, why do you support terrorism?

[Endus]

the problem is this, okay:

Biden's response, and your responses, are effectively solidifying Russian's status as a terrorist state no different from ISIS (etc) despite its place in history.

Nope.

The reality of what's happening is that Griner stands accused of crimes in Russia, and was arrested accordingly. This is not a "hostage situation" in any official sense. It's the standard practice of rule of law. What's being sought is extradition, not the release of a hostage. Treating it officially as a hostage situation is a stance that denies the validity of foreign sovereignty and legal systems, and that's an enormous can of worms no one wants to crack open. Officially, it's seeking extradition.

Literally nothing about this tries to frame Russia as a "terrorist state" except your presentation of it as a hostage situation, which it's not, fundamentally. Now, in practice, the charges may be being applied to exert political pressure, but that still doesn't make it a terrorist act.

Also, Russia's "place in history"? Means absolutely fucking jack shit. That's a made-up excuse that holds no water whatsoever. Modern Russia's "place in history" isn't even significant; it dates back to 1993. Ukraine is an older independent country than modern Russia.

[YUPPIE]

I forgot to clarify I'm speaking under the wholesale impression Griner's crime was made up by Russians considering the hostilities rising at the time. I didn't know others in here thought she actually carried drugs. I really thought no one would buy into that considering the timeline.

[Endus]

I forgot to clarify I'm speaking under the wholesale impression Griner's crime was made up by Russians considering the hostilities rising at the time. I didn't know others in here thought she actually carried drugs. I really thought no one would buy into that considering the timeline.

This doesn't matter. It's still not a hostage situation and can't be compared to a criminal kidnapping.

[YUPPIE]

This doesn't matter. It's still not a hostage situation and can't be compared to a criminal kidnapping.

considering the fact she's being held up for negotiations/bargaining and Biden is treating it exactly like some prisoner's dilemma, she is definitely in a hostage situation at the least. That much is undeniable. And Biden said "no" to Russia today, firmly.

That is all. And from the headlines, Republicans are very disappointed.

[Breccia]

Biden is treating it exactly like some prisoner's dilemma

Based on what else you posted today, you don't know what that term means. Please don't use terms you don't understand.

[Jaransan]

That is all. And from the headlines, Republicans are very disappointed.

With all due respect (not much), Republicans would be very disappointed in Biden no matter what he chose. Thats literally a built in policy position of Republicans at this point - its not and hasnt been about actually making the right decisions for a long time. Its just about performing for the rapidly dwindling number of people who lack the pattern recognition required to vote for them.

[Spectral]

I forgot to clarify I'm speaking under the wholesale impression Griner's crime was made up by Russians considering the hostilities rising at the time. I didn't know others in here thought she actually carried drugs. I really thought no one would buy into that considering the timeline.

What exactly are you arguing? We know that the drug charges weren't made up out of whole cloth because Griner doesn't dispute that she brought cannabis in:

During court hearings, her defense team argued for leniency, saying that Ms. Griner had not intended to smuggle narcotics into Russia and that, like many other international athletes, she had used cannabis to help ease pain from injuries.

A narcology expert testified in court on Tuesday, Ms. Griner’s lawyers said, to present a case that in some countries, including the United States, medical cannabis “is a popular treatment, specifically among athletes.”

“With the prescription in place, Brittney may have used it for medical, but not for recreational purposes,” said Maria Blagovolina, one of Ms. Griner’s lawyers and a partner at Rybalkin, Gortsunyan, Dyakin & Partners, a firm in Moscow.

I don't agree with the Russian criminal code on this, but that's not actually relevant. I don't see a compelling case for the United States trading anything of value for Griner's freedom.

[Zan15]

FL taxpayers will have their portion due on any debts of the United States until and unless they leave the union. Money taken from Floridians to pay down the national debt doesn't reduce any tax burdens ... it's just additional taxes on the state taxpayers to gain the money in the first place.

.

I mean simple math seems to escape you.

If you borrow 100 dollars and give FL 20 of it, but florida accepts it and returns 20 dollars to the treasury and in return the overall debt is reduced to 80 dollars.....tell me what is FL new portion of debt?

Let's say Florida's tax share is 5%

at 100 dollars Florida owes a 5% of 100 dollars.

at 80 dollars Florida owes a 5% of 80 dollars.

Now tell me was Florida's tax burden lowered because they returned 20 dollars and reduced the overall debt owed?


If all the debt is paid off then the federal govt can either send more money to the states or they can reduce the overall tax rate.

[tehdang]

I mean simple math seems to escape you.

If you borrow 100 dollars and give FL 20 of it, but florida accepts it and returns 20 dollars to the treasury and in return the overall debt is reduced to 80 dollars.....tell me what is FL new portion of debt?

Let's say Florida's tax share is 5%

at 100 dollars Florida owes a 5% of 100 dollars.

at 80 dollars Florida owes a 5% of 80 dollars.

Now tell me was Florida's tax burden lowered because they returned 20 dollars and reduced the overall debt owed?


If all the debt is paid off then the federal govt can either send more money to the states or they can reduce the overall tax rate.

They took money from Florida taxpayers (both literally in taxes, and in the form of a debt burden ultimately backed by them), and are spending a very tiny relative amount to that on FL with specific strings attached to where or how it might be spent. Whatever you posit Florida gives back is not applied to deficit reduction, just like the several trillion appropriated for COVID spending that hasn't been spent yet doesn't go back to reduce the deficit. It just gets spent in other ways for other people. FL is always net behind on the deal, for all the administration fees, and none of it goes to reducing the debt anyways. I wish it worked your way. It should also make intuitive sense that the government does not take money from A, receive it at B, and return it to a subset of A at no cost and waste in the turnaround. And you should also know from your simple math pocketbook that extra dollars flow to other avenues than reducing your debt, like booze and entertainment, and the credit card balance can keep growing.

They're clawing back some reduced portion of the money they sent in, and people like you demand some kissing of the ring on threat of calling them hypocrites. It's totally unprincipled, and not at all convincing. This entire story has washed away because Democrats are never going to see a win telling taxpayers that they must get behind every increase in government spending, before dutifully receiving any from such increases they oppose.

[Edge-]

And you should also know from your simple math pocketbook that extra dollars flow to other avenues than reducing your debt, like booze and entertainment, and the credit card balance can keep growing.

And you should know that comparing government budgets and personal budgets is actually a bad comparison as the two are radically different in their operation and intent.

Here's an article detailing why that's a bad comparison: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...ilies/12724708

[tehdang]

And you should know that comparing government budgets and personal budgets is actually a bad comparison as the two are radically different in their operation and intent.

Here's an article detailing why that's a bad comparison: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...ilies/12724708

Luckily for you, it was him and not you that used "simple math seems to escape you" and basic "[X] owes 5% of 100$" comparisons. But I do register your viewpoint that he should've never stepped this down to a case of getting simple math wrong. Your basic flaws were much earlier in the thread than his. It involved a lot of dumbing this issue down simply to hypocrisy, and then begging out to things being too complicated when that just didn't suffice as an attack. But we needn't bring that up again.

[Edge-]

Luckily for you, it was him and not you that used "simple math seems to escape you" and basic "[X] owes 5% of 100$" comparisons. But I do register your viewpoint that he should've never stepped this down to a case of getting simple math wrong. Your basic flaws were much earlier in the thread than his. It involved a lot of dumbing this issue down simply to hypocrisy, and then begging out to things being too complicated when that just didn't suffice as an attack. But we needn't bring that up again.

You're the one that brought it into the home when discussing buying booze and entertainment. He didn't make that association, you did. He just said the math was simple.

[Flarelaine]

the problem is this, okay:

Biden's response, and your responses, are effectively solidifying Russian's status as a terrorist state no different from ISIS (etc) despite its place in history.

Russia'a place in history has been that of a bully at least as far back as when the Principality of Moscow started overrunning neighbouring Russian states around 1300. They are living up to that to this day.

[jonnysensible]

lol @ Bidens new sanctions. 'China’s semiconductor manufacturing industry was reduced to zero overnight. Complete collapse. No chance of survival.'

RIP CCP BOZOS

[Zan15]

They took money from Florida taxpayers (both literally in taxes, and in the form of a debt burden ultimately backed by them), and are spending a very tiny relative amount to that on FL with specific strings attached to where or how it might be spent. Whatever you posit Florida gives back is not applied to deficit reduction, just like the several trillion appropriated for COVID spending that hasn't been spent yet doesn't go back to reduce the deficit. It just gets spent in other ways for other people. FL is always net behind on the deal, for all the administration fees, and none of it goes to reducing the debt anyways. I wish it worked your way. It should also make intuitive sense that the government does not take money from A, receive it at B, and return it to a subset of A at no cost and waste in the turnaround. And you should also know from your simple math pocketbook that extra dollars flow to other avenues than reducing your debt, like booze and entertainment, and the credit card balance can keep growing.

They're clawing back some reduced portion of the money they sent in, and people like you demand some kissing of the ring on threat of calling them hypocrites. It's totally unprincipled, and not at all convincing. This entire story has washed away because Democrats are never going to see a win telling taxpayers that they must get behind every increase in government spending, before dutifully receiving any from such increases they oppose.

Again, if you make a check out directly to the treasury for repayment of the debt that is exactly what the money will be used for.


https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454


Florida can even do it simply on the govt web site set up for that very purpose.

It exactly "works your (my) way"


Florida took the money already so it has nothing to do with un-appropriated money, they can send back every dime reducing the overall debt of the US govt and in proportion reducing the overall debt of every taxpayer in florida.


But they didn't do that huh?

[D3thray]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna52037

Saudi Arabia says U.S. asked it to postpone oil supply cut by a month
Such a delay in the OPEC+ move could have staved off price rises at American pumps until after the midterm elections.

Saudi Arabia has suggested the U.S. asked it to wait a month before it cut oil production, defending a move the White House has heavily criticized as helping Russia's war in Ukraine.

Such a delay in the OPEC+ supply reduction could have staved off price rises at American pumps until after the midterm elections, although the Saudi Foreign Affairs Ministry did not specifically mention the midterms in its lengthy and abrupt statement late Wednesday.


Rising fuel costs are a key driver of inflation, which hit 8.2% in September and shows no sign of slowing down to remain top of mind for many Americans as Democrats hope to hold on to their slim majority in Congress.

The White House pushed back against any suggestion that it made a politically motivated request; National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson said in a statement early Friday that it was “categorically false to connect this to U.S. elections.”

“It’s always been about the impact on the global economy and impact on families at home and around the world, especially as Putin wages his war against Ukraine,” she added, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It’s the latest exchange to punctuate a delicate relationship between Washington and Riyadh. President Joe Biden initially called the kingdom a “pariah” before he traveled to the kingdom this summer to fist-bump Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in a much-criticized overture to increase global oil production.

As the de facto head of OPEC+, Saudi Arabia rejected the appeal. The alliance instead announced this week that it would cut global supply by 2 million barrels, drawing heavy criticism from Biden and other Democrats, who saw it as siding with the Kremlin. As an oil-exporting giant, Russia an OPEC+ member, would benefit from rising prices.

Some Democrats suggested the U.S. re-evaluate its entire relationship with the kingdom, with Biden vowing “consequences” for a decision many viewed as a boon to Putin.

Saudi Arabia hit back Thursday, releasing a long, pointed statement in which it rejected suggestions the cut was "politically motivated," saying the decision was reached by consensus and made to “protect the global economy from oil-market volatility.”

It said “attempts to distort the facts” were “unfortunate.”

The kingdom had “clarified through its continuous consultation with the U.S. administration that all economic analyses indicate that postponing the OPEC+ decision for a month, according to what has been suggested, would have had negative economic consequences," the statement added.

The Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous sources, first reported this week that the U.S. requested a delay.

“It seems this is not about Russia but instead about the U.S. midterm elections,” Mohammed Alyahya, a fellow at the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative at the Harvard Kennedy School, told NBC News. “The expectation that Saudi Arabia must manipulate global energy markets to influence domestic U.S. politics is absurd.”

A link was flatly rejected by the White House, which suggested some OPEC countries privately opposed the move.

"We presented Saudi Arabia with economic data in order for them to wait and understand the markets before making this shortsighted decision," said Watson, the National Security Council spokesperson.

John Kirby, the National Security Council’s coordinator for strategic communications, said Saudi Arabia was trying to "spin and deflect" on the issue.

"We presented Saudi Arabia with analysis to show that there was no market basis to cut production targets, and that they could easily wait for the next OPEC meeting to see how things developed," he said in a statement. "Other OPEC nations communicated to us privately that they also disagreed with the Saudi decision, but felt coerced to support Saudi’s direction."

Like many other Western governments, Washington has long sought to balance reliance on Saudi Arabia, the world's second-largest oil producer, with holding it to account over human rights.

The crown prince's supporters say he has modernized the kingdom, diversifying its reliance on exporting fossil fuels, allowing women to drive and opening up movie theaters for the first time in decades. But human rights groups say that, if anything, the country has entrenched its position as one of the world's worst human rights abusers, a brutal theocracy that oppresses political dissent, women and the LGBTQ community.

MBS, as he is known, has also sought to burnish his kingdom's image abroad by investing in and hosting Western sports and entertainment while attempting diplomatic overtures like his hosting of Biden this summer.

The Saudis say the decision to cut oil supply was about stabilizing the global market, but the U.S. sees it as OPEC+’s effectively siding with Russia. As the Kremlin suffers heavy losses of troops and territory, it has been accused of using energy as a weapon against Europe — which has long relied on Moscow's fossil fuels — and the wider world, which is dealing with inflation partly sparked by the war.

Are we really not going to talk about this? This story is days old, I figured somebody would have posted something about this. Not even some kind of shady conspiracy site source, this is NBC News highlighting the implications of this story that was first reported in the WSJ. Biden asking the Saudi’s to delay oil production cut until after the US midterm and then threatening ‘consequences’ in a later interview after the cuts were announced.

I mean that’s virtually the same scenario that got Trump impeached the first go round.

[Templar 331]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna52037



Are we really not going to talk about this? This story is days old, I figured somebody would have posted something about this. Not even some kind of shady conspiracy site source, this is NBC News highlighting the implications of this story that was first reported in the WSJ. Biden asking the Saudi’s to delay oil production cut until after the US midterm and then threatening ‘consequences’ in a later interview after the cuts were announced.

I mean that’s virtually the same scenario that got Trump impeached the first go round.

No, it's not. The production cut hurts everyone. Ukraine not lying hurt only Trump.

Maybe we should talk about how the Saudis have ties with the Republicans and how this cut might be used to help them in the election? I know I'm tired of seeing Biden "I did that" stickers on gas pumps because the blame for a price hike when Biden took office was put on his administration and not the previous one makes me think it will happen again.