J.C.MacSwell

I suspect there will be a point where Yangmania takes over...but really...I think it is all basic foundation that he has fully thought out...a step by step process. The great thing is that he doesn't need to hide his agenda, because he is targeting helping everyone. Even the currently advantaged will appreciate his approach and candour, and understand the basic fairness he espouses. I will admit that it will get interesting when his policies are put under more scrutiny...(but no doubt he'll overcome it) A small concern...I think some of his ideas are untenable...but those are mostly all peripheral to a well thought out set of economic and social policies. Ha ha...i just googled Yangmania and nothing came up...

Hadn't heard of her either but did read the link. (and thanks)

If, say, Trump came up with a bona fide National interest reason to justify his request for information on the Biden's, that would make it clearly in a grey area. (since the self interest reason is fairly obvious). But I was generalizing in response to the particular campaign law with regard to foreign nationals.

I gave an example. It was called "trivial". Somewhere between that and an indictable offence lies a grey area for impeachment, What part, specifically, are you struggling with?

Tulsi's change in position is new. I knew Yang's position was that he supported impeachment. He also recognizes it as a trap (his word).

The irony.

Where did I claim otherwise? My claim was with regard to how broad a brush could be used in interpreting the Law....which puts any interpretation somewhat arbitrary.

knowingly solicit, accept, or receive

You don't like my assumptions. (Not only that but you construe them as a defence of Trump) Try to understand the difference.

They are. You could draw a line somewhere between these types of misconduct...just be careful to keep Biden on the safe side of your line if you wish to do so in a partisan manner. I think I have proved my point. "Trivializing" it for you to make it clear. Note there are other lines for criminal indictment...also in grey areas.

Another example: Do you think there are no foreign nationals holding signs at US political rallies? It's a grey area. Trump would no doubt claim other motives. I'm not defending him. I'm making the fairly obvious claim that impeachment is primarily partisan. I did not say impeachment was totally partisan as you claim. I said the line drawing for it was...

Well...it is certainly one example...and a very arbitrary and partisan one.

Knowingly accept or receive damaging information from a foreign national? Taken literally, this would include pretty much everyone who ever ran for President. It's a grey area. The line drawing is totally partisan for impeachment.

This is true if the packet of air is accelerating downward at g. Otherwise it is not.

Tulsi has made the October debate (debates? 12 candidates now have made it, so 6 and 6?) https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/tulsi-gabbard-is-the-12th-candidate-to-make-octobers-democratic-debate/ Yang just hit 8% nationally (probably a bit of an anomaly right now, but just a matter of time and he will be in double digits...) https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/september-national-poll-warren-surges-biden-slips-and-sanders-holds-creating-three-way-dead-heat-for-the-nomination

She will almost certainly pass and pull away from Biden, especially if Bernie fades without her overly attacking him. I just hope it happens slow enough that Yang has time to gain some more attention and momentum.

Thanks for the link. He interviews well. Besides his "Freedom Dividend" ($1000/month UBI), he is all about what political discourse should look like, IMO. I don't think it will be to long before he start's looking like more than a long shot. It will be between him and Warren IMO.

owned net assets above 50 million. Good luck to her with that. Accounting nightmare...like trying to catch a greased pig...and her numbers assume an economy unhindered by the socialist policies she wants to bring in. It's hardly "honest and authentic" to avoid admitting her policies will increase taxes...regardless of how justifiable it may seem. Bernie admits he will raise taxes. He is honest and authentic. He just doesn't realize how badly it would work out.

Do you like the part where she is evasive as to whether her implication that she won't raise middle class taxes is untrue?

I cannot. Thanks for the reply. That certainly sounds like what it should be like...but I guess it is unlikely in this particular political climate. (the climate that needs to change...)

What do you think it would look like?

Well...no one fits that description If you are suggesting equality in outcomes it is far from slight. A guaranteed basic income would substantially reduce the requirement for a welfare safety net. It wouldn't pull someone out of poverty on it's own but could make a significant difference to their efforts.

I don't know many people that old... Obviously you are trying to include their ancestors...but how does that work? Many slaves were son's and daughters of their masters...you can't track it all...so ultimately you are judging based on their (apparent) race. Better to treat everyone equally...differentiating only to ensure a degree equal opportunity where and when it clearly doesn't exist. UBI isn't perfect, but it has levelling affects without requiring someone to make judgements...a mess that really should be avoided...especially when it comes to something as potentially divisive as judging people based on race.

Universal Basic Income. Based on equality, but has the most effect on the "short guy" without the stigma...or anyone telling them which game they must watch...in fact it might allow them to choose to get in a game and play.

Fair enough. I don't expect this is homework though. Koti has been around for quite a while. Assuming he is looking for a realistic estimate, it comes down to making the right assumptions and some engineering tables. ...or experimenting.