Conservation or Big Beautiful Ballrooms?

[NR_Hunter]

I just grok'ed this, and it looks like this money is strictly for security upgrades for SS and hardening the target following the third assassination attempt, and cannot be spent on anything else. A lifelong friend of mine in the Special Ops community outlined how 5 or 6 guys could have carried out an End of Governance operation; the entire leadership structure of our country suddenly gone. I guess I don't think a billion is all that much to prevent that.

Could have is not the same as would have, but I do agree for the most part.

If a random psycho with a shotgun could run past 12 armed guards it’s not a good look when you consider what a small handful of well trained dudes could do, especially when you factor in suicide vests.

But overall f*CK the ballroom idc about that damn shit.

 

[BuzzH]

I just grok'ed this, and it looks like this money is strictly for security upgrades for SS and hardening the target following the third assassination attempt, and cannot be spent on anything else. A lifelong friend of mine in the Special Ops community outlined how 5 or 6 guys could have carried out an End of Governance operation; the entire leadership structure of our country suddenly gone. I guess I don't think a billion is all that much to prevent that.

Not true, there are no strings attached in the bill for strictly use of the billion that is being pushed for security upgrades. That's just more gaslighting hoping nobody reads the bill language.

 

[nrpate05]

Everybody relax, it'll all be paid for with tariff revenue, even after every American gets a $2000 check and federal income tax is eliminated. It's truly amazing how dumb our politicians think Americans are. I guess it has worked for a long time because legacy media just repeated the political talking points. The idea that the ballroom is necessary for security is completely insane.

I remember my dad always voting republican because they were 'fiscally conservative.' That ended a long time ago. Increasing the debt because of useless wars while cutting programs that actually help Americans is the name of the game these days. The Dems aren't any better. The only difference is that the Dems say they are going to spend money and the Repubs say they're not going to, but they always increase the debt while regular Americans take it on the chin.

 

[Bonasababy]

MN had an $11 billion surplus a few years ago that was spent in the blink of an eye. Leave it to political members to light money on fire. I'm all for budget cuts but lets be smart about it. I'd rather cut funding to learing centers and funding to foreign countries, then allocate those funds to conservation.

Takes digging into details to understand the real impact, some of which is transforming and a big aid to the economy of the state.

Not all progressive ideas are bad, despite what one party promotes.

Was a time where some progressive ideas bashed by them today were started by Republicans.

Obamacare actually was first implemented by Mitt Romney. Could have just as well called it Romneycare. In my state, provisions to protect water quality and mitigate agriculture impact on it and steer energy sourcing towards renewable were first developed and championed by republican governors (Arne Carlson and Tim Pawlenty).

What's missing with progressive measures is a review of impact a few years later. Those that dont work or do what was intended need to be considered for changes or dropping.

 

[Bonasababy]

Everybody relax, it'll all be paid for with tariff revenue, even after every American gets a $2000 check and federal income tax is eliminated. It's truly amazing how dumb our politicians think Americans are. I guess it has worked for a long time because legacy media just repeated the political talking points. The idea that the ballroom is necessary for security is completely insane.

I remember my dad always voting republican because they were 'fiscally conservative.' That ended a long time ago. Increasing the debt because of useless wars while cutting programs that actually help Americans is the name of the game these days. The Dems aren't any better. The only difference is that the Dems say they are going to spend money and the Repubs say they're not going to, but they always increase the debt while regular Americans take it on the chin.

Trump may be an outlier yet but the biggest increase in the debt in recent decades has come from tax cuts enacted by republican administrations.

People just cant get their head around that...but the compounding effect of 100s of millions of people paying less in taxes has a huge impact on the debt.

 

[Irrelevant]

I remember my dad always voting republican because they were 'fiscally conservative.'

Fiscal conservatism ends at the County level, though many States do a fairly decent job too (at least some years under some administrations).