No, it’s not. “Austerity” implies that everyone does without. It’s not that at all, it’s simply vindictive. They want to subject people they hate to “austerity”, while carving out exceptions for their friends (who they think deserve it more, anyway).
Trump floats
I was gonna post that that was doubtful, but then I Did My Own Research and discovered that morbidly obese people have an easier time floating
Aren’t they losing a ton of money, though?
surely they wouldnt have invested trillons on it if it was garbage
Oh, my sweet summer child.
“They” didn’t invest trillions of their own money in it. They invested a few million, built up some hype, and got other people to invest more, so now their millions are billions. And they are smart enough to sell before it all collapses.
They make their billions even though it’s garbage. Heck, they make billions because they know it’s garbage before everyone else does.
This joke is off the rails
The thing with laws is that Congress can always change them by passing another law…
… but from what I’ve read, the current text of Joe Wilson’s bill carves out an exception for “living and former Presidents”. So, if this passes, we may get our Obama $420 bill someday…
Big Fly Ohtani-San!
Here’s a link to a news station not run by a fascist enabler
https://www.wavy.com/news/politics/trump-250-bill-proposal-sparks-backlash/
The reported push by Trump administration officials comes despite the 1866 Thayer Amendment, which makes it illegal to put the likeness of a living person on official U.S. currency, bonds or other financial notes. Additionally, current law limits U.S. currency to specific denominations and a $250 bill is not on that list.
Note = loan in this context. OP is saying he doesn’t want the burden of a monthly payment on a new car, and would rather buy a cheaper car that he doesn’t need to borrow for. (Although these are becoming harder to find, at least in the US…)
Insolent peasant! You shall address him by his proper title!
King Steven the Turd, Greediest of Pigboys
No, they definitely would sit on the appointment if it’s someone dumb.
They might take what they think is the “middle ground” and let a “compromise candidate” through. But I hope they remember that Merrick Garland was the “compromise candidate”, and Mitch and Lindsey still shit all over that pick.
No but that judge probably got a nice bonus for the ruling.
Sir, I am offended! There is no way this official received a bonus or bribe of any kind before the ruling. That would be unethical!
This officer received his payment after the ruling was made. That makes it a gratuity, which is acceptable, according to no less an authority than Brett Kavanaugh.
How much property? You could just register 1 sqcm of your lawn to each corp…
However, plaintiff has not demonstrated that this policy violates the principle of one person/entity/one vote.
Since when did we ever have a principle of “one entity/one vote”?
This is a gigantic loophole, simply live in that town and register a corporation there and you can vote twice.
The way I look at it, it’s a shared resource. You are just as “entitled” to the space as the person behind you.
If I need the space, I will try and use it. But, I will move back slowly, and stop if I meet any resistance. There is nothing worse than having someone slam their seat back into your laptop (or worse, onto your knees…)
They sort of tried this once already, by threatening to suspend TSA Precheck during the shutdown, even though Precheck does legitimately save time all around for everyone. They backed off of that pretty quickly.
Hah, they think they can make flying through Newark shittier than it already is?
If Democrats win control of the House, then it will happen earlier, because once the VP becomes President, the VP position becomes vacant, and can only be filled if both houses of Congress approve. And Democrats would likely use the “McConnell doctrine” to sit on any appointment made by President Vance and not act on it.
That would effectively give Democrats an extra half vote in the Senate, because there would be no VP to break ties. And the next Democratic House Speaker would be next in line if, somehow, President Vance gets implicated in some scandal and has to resign.
So, once the returns are in (with good news for Democrats), if the plan was to shove Trump to the side it will happen before the new House takes over, while Republicans can still pick a new VP.
No, if you call it “austerity” you are at least trying to hide it behind a veneer of self sacrifice. These folks aren’t even doing that anymore.