socphoenix

How exactly is this not considered murder for all parties involved in a decision like this?

I shop for two people and buy 2 days food at a time. On average each store visit have been $30 at Safeway, $26 at Kroger and $19 at Walmart. These large grocery chains are massively screwing people and the only difference I can find is at least Safeway doesn’t try to trick you with bullshit pricing.

The 30+ years they’ve also tied up compensation in the courts saying they shouldn’t be responsible for the damages that happened bombing a city block?

Weird, here’s the direct link without the formatting:

https://www.costplusdrugs.com/

cost plus drugs give me 90 day supply for about $45 of strattera without insurance, I’ve been using that since my health insurance has a carve out for mental health…

I bet I can guess which option it is…

That is 10,000% people who don’t do creative work especially professionally. I am fine with gimp and darktable versus anything Adobe/paid but I also barely use them lol. I would be back off Linux in a heartbeat if I honestly couldn’t use something I needed even though I prefer it.

To add on to this, it’s also why liberal talking points tend to really highlight savings from programs. As another easy example of good spending: if it costs $50k to send someone to drug rehab versus $75k to house them in prison for a year, with respective rehabilitation rates for 65 and 48 percent, you save and make money twice. Not only is it cheaper up front to send them to rehab, but the lack of a criminal record leaves that person more free when searching for jobs later which can make them a much more productive taxpayer from an input to the economy standard.

Is there a specific item you’re looking at? The issue here is in a few different areas but largely breaks down to

1. It’s not one person but multiple
2. A checkbook is a terrible analogy that at least in the US is just used as a way to make political points.

To 1, imagine you and someone else who disagrees with you on basically every financial aspect has to decide how to spend income together. That is likely not going to be a short or fun process.

For 2, a lot of what they are actually talking about here is debt. Debt gets trickier at a nation-state level as it’s not as simple as how much can I repay. Economies all use at least some debt and that debt comes with economic complications. For instance, let’s say we take on debt that pays for roads that will improve shipping times by 25% while reducing vehicle deaths by 5%. Both of those are economic boons, reduced shipping times means potentially more money from in country sales and exports and removed the economic losses of both the death itself and the loss of future economic gains from that individual. This kind of debt quite literally brings in more money than it costs to service that debt.

On the other hand debt that say gets wasted say reopening Alcatraz is debt that won’t go towards any meaningful economic gain and we lose money on it.

Basically (for the US at least), any time someone mentions the term checkbook when referring to the government they are either purposefully trying to mislead you, or are not appreciating the full range of government spending in a way that is a massive detriment to the way we choose to run our government.

Wonder how much of a bonus the sick fuck who pitched that got for the idea?

Personal experience it is either extreme hate or extreme respect for the institution with no in between. The idea of not caring about them isn’t possible out here from a religious perspective

“People are worried, even some people who voted for you, saying ‘I didn’t sign up for this.’ So how do you address those concerns?” ABC host Terry Moran asked Trump.

“They did sign up for it, actually, and this is what I campaigned on,” Trump replied. He added, when questioned about price increases on electronics, clothing and homebuilding, that “China probably will eat those tariffs.”

Man I hope democrats use that ammunition he left sitting there for the next 80 years.