Pokebball Posted August 2 Posted August 2 (edited) 14 hours ago, ChiGoose said: The one put in place during COVID cut the monthly child poverty rate by 30% before it was allowed to expire. Not truthful, really. There were many reliefs implemented during covid, with the most significant being the direct stimulus payments and PPP. All combined they cut the poverty rate. It's also important to note that the poverty rate is a measure of household income and while that is certainly related to the amount spent on kiddos, it isn't a measure of the amount spent on kiddos. Again here, where those dollars were spent are the decisions of the parents. I know quite a few clients that purchased a new vehicle, when that really wasn't necessary, with these benefits. That purchase, which did prop up the economy (one goal of the stimulus), it really didn't provide any additional benefit to the kiddos. And as a poster already mentioned, the remote schooling has significantly impacted our younger children. Impact that will follow those children, and our society, for decades. Edited August 2 by Pokebball 1
Tommy Callahan Posted August 2 Posted August 2 3 minutes ago, SCBills said: So… what’s the answer here? Just let this happen? I understand that it’s more complex than “that’s actually a dude”, and that these women aren’t undefeated, but having XY chromosomes is very clearly a different level than “Michael Phelps is double jointed” that the left wants to argue is in the same realm. It's gonna take the cycle a day to come up with a narrative of how everyone is wrong and this is normal.
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 2 minutes ago, SCBills said: So… what’s the answer here? Just let this happen? I understand that it’s more complex than “that’s actually a dude”, and that these women aren’t undefeated, but having XY chromosomes is very clearly a different level than “Michael Phelps is double jointed” that the left wants to argue is in the same realm. Yeah, no. She was stopped from the Russian-led IBA, which has been in dispute with the Olympic boxing committee for years now. She’s 112 pounds. She’s not Ivan Drago. Get over it. Just now, Tommy Callahan said: It's gonna take the cycle a day to come up with a narrative of how everyone is wrong and this is normal. Well, you are wrong. So there’s that. 46 minutes ago, Biden is Mentally Fit said: Do you support the notion that it is appropriate for those born as male to compete in women’s athletics? It’s ok to say yes or no. You seem reluctant to do so. I am ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted August 2 Posted August 2 1 minute ago, Pokebball said: Not truthful, really. There were many reliefs implemented during covid, with the most significant being the direct stimulus payments and PPP. All combined they cut the poverty rate. It's also important to note that the poverty rate is a measure of household income and while that is certainly related to the amount spent on kiddos, it isn't a measure of the amount spent on kiddos. Again here, where those dollars were spent are the decisions of the parents. I know quite a few clients that purchased a new vehicle, when that really wasn't necessary, with these benefits. That purchase, which did prop up the economy (one goal of the stimulus), it really didn't provide any additional benefit to the kiddos. And as a poster already mentioned, the remote schooling has significantly impacted our younger children. Impact that will follow those children, and our society, for decades. The only metric that supports it is the fact it pushed household reportable incomes up. Then they report the amount of children that moved out of a household below the poverty level. It was also fully refundable so the income tax payment was a windfall. What. 2 g per kid no matter what. It's good when one can help children suffering. It's indigenous to argue that that program only helped kids. That cash also support addiction that negatively affected children. 1
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted August 2 Posted August 2 3 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Yeah, no. She was stopped from the Russian-led IBA, which has been in dispute with the Olympic boxing committee for years now. She’s 112 pounds. She’s not Ivan Drago. Get over it. Well, you are wrong. So there’s that. I am ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so. How about at the high school level or a Leah Thomas situation? Ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so? 1
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 Just now, Biden is Mentally Fit said: How about at the high school level or a Leah Thomas situation? Ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so? Yes because they are the experts and you are not. 1
phypon Posted August 2 Posted August 2 (edited) Roundy: "I am ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so. " You're overlords have spoken. It's okay for men to compete and beat up women for sport. Comply. Obey. Good doggie. edit: quote got messed up. Edited August 2 by phypon 1 3
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted August 2 Posted August 2 Just now, Roundybout said: Yes because they are the experts and you are not. What makes one an expert at the state school board level as it relates to letting boys compete against girls? Don’t you care about girls that work hard to excel on a level playing field only to have an “expert” then tilt the field? Why is it ok to sh*t on girls so that one or two anomalous people can feel better by beating them? It makes no sense. Tell me why it’s ok without going to the “expert” crutch.
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 4 minutes ago, phypon said: Roundy: "I am ok with it if the ruling bodies deem it so. " You're overlords have spoken. It's okay for men to compete and beat up women for sport. Comply. Obey. Good doggie. edit: quote got messed up. They are not men, so I can immediately disregard your comment, which is nice
SCBills Posted August 2 Posted August 2 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Yes because they are the experts and you are not. If there was ever a modern day Democrat response, this is it. Have you considered thinking for yourself? Edited August 2 by SCBills 1
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 (edited) 1 minute ago, Biden is Mentally Fit said: What makes one an expert at the state school board level as it relates to letting boys compete against girls? Don’t you care about girls that work hard to excel on a level playing field only to have an “expert” then tilt the field? Why is it ok to sh*t on girls so that one or two anomalous people can feel better by beating them? It makes no sense. Tell me why it’s ok without going to the “expert” crutch. If a group of people with medical knowledge determine that there’s no significant physical advantage, then there is no harm in my book. No one is pooping on girls, I assure you. Calm down. Just now, SCBills said: If there was ever a modern day Democrat response, this is it. Have you ever considered thinking for yourself? Have you ever considered the average Joe is a drizzling moron? Have you ever been to a planning board meeting? Edited August 2 by Roundybout 1
SCBills Posted August 2 Posted August 2 1 minute ago, Roundybout said: If a group of people with medical knowledge determine that there’s no significant physical advantage, then there is no harm in my book. No one is pooping on girls, I assure you. Calm down. Have you ever considered the average Joe is a drizzling moron? Have you ever been to a planning board meeting? Experts told you to keep six feet of distance during covid. They literally made it up.
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted August 2 Posted August 2 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Roundybout said: If a group of people with medical knowledge determine that there’s no significant physical advantage, then there is no harm in my book. No one is pooping on girls, I assure you. Calm down. Have you ever considered the average Joe is a drizzling moron? Have you ever been to a planning board meeting? Leah Thomas had no significant physical advantage over women?? Ignore what you want so badly to believe and tell me what you know to be true even though you are not an “expert”. Also, you have told us you are a moral person. Why is it morally ok to put girls in a position that they must compete athletically against males? Edited August 2 by Biden is Mentally Fit 1
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 1 minute ago, Biden is Mentally Fit said: Leah Thomas had no significant physical advantage over women?? Ignore what you want so badly to believe and tell me what you know to be true even though you are not an “expert”. Remind me again who this Leah Thomas person is that has you in hysterics? 3 minutes ago, SCBills said: Experts told you to keep six feet of distance during covid. They literally made it up. They didn’t but alright
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted August 2 Posted August 2 1 minute ago, Roundybout said: Remind me again who this Leah Thomas person is that has you in hysterics? They didn’t but alright I’m sorry that your position is so weak that you have to resort to being wholly disingenuous. It’s better to not respond than be so childish. You are one that would be considered book-smart, correct? 1 2
Roundybout Posted August 2 Posted August 2 Just now, Biden is Mentally Fit said: I’m sorry that your position is so weak that you have to resort to being wholly disingenuous. It’s better to not respond than be so childish. You are one that would be considered book-smart, correct? It’s a genuine question. I don’t recall who that is. In the meantime, looks like the anti-trans hysterics were completely unfounded. Again.
BillsFanNC Posted August 2 Author Posted August 2 Anyone else here a biologist? I am. Therefore I'm an expert. Trans women are men. End of discussion. 1 1
phypon Posted August 2 Posted August 2 11 minutes ago, Roundybout said: They are not men, so I can immediately disregard your comment, which is nice Neither are you... /joking Sorry, I couldn't resist hitting you with that burn. It was just right there for the taking.
Recommended Posts