placeholder

Such clueless nonsense. Has it occurred to you that the people who are contributing might just possibly agree with her?

As per usual, you're getting the facts wrong. Those OECD figures reflect total government spending in the USA. Including state and local governments. It's not just about federal spending.

Greta Thunberg: German police deny protest detainment was staged German police have denied being "extras for Greta Thunberg" after false claims that her detainment at a protest in western Germany was staged. A viral post falsely claimed the climate activist being held by police was "all set up for the cameras". Ms Thunberg and other activists were seeking to stop the abandoned village of Lützerath from being demolished for the expansion of a coal mine. https://www.yahoo.com/now/greta-thunberg-german-police-deny-173352440.html

Lots of people with psychological problems accomplish great things. It says nothing about the validity of their efforts or the nature of the problems they address.

I know you didn't mean it that way, but Grete Thunberg is far from being disabled. As, Oliver Sacks, that profound observer of people on the Asperger spectrum observed, because of their extraordinary focus, they are capable of great things. Her affect may be a bit strange, but that says nothing about the quality of her thoughts. Also, time has passed and she is now 20.

Do I really have to explain to you how evidence works? You don't get do-overs after you've outed yourself. Unless you can travel backwards in time, you're toast.

Russia is a superpower? It has an economy smaller than Canada's and is heavily weighted towards the production of raw materials. Materials which other countries add lots of value to. What Russia has is nuclear weapons. The rest of its armed forces are clearly a travesty. If being able to destroy civilization makes post-Soviet Russia a superpower, then it has been one for its entire existence.

Does this sentence look familiar? Stay at home and make a video call then sweetie I don't recall you using the term "sweetie" for any male figures in the news.

And they could all have watched each other.

Really? Including this? https://twitter.com/i/status/1615418010558144512

What looks the same? People physically gathered in one place to protest look the same as someone speaking via video to other people watching via video? Really? Maybe you're watching the news on a repurposed Pong screen?

Actually, it's probably the case that China's population has already been shrinking: Leaked Data Show China’s Population Is Shrinking Fast Because China has always massaged its demographic figures and cracked down on anyone who challenges the official line, there are endless debates about the true size and growth trajectory of the country's population. But a recent, large-scale data breach offers some sorely needed clarity. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/chinese-population-smaller-than-stated-and-shrinking-fast-by-yi-fuxian-2022-07

The point of these meetings is to draw wider attention to problems. Video conferences don't make for compelling viewing.

Pretty silly actually, You seem to forget that the EU actually plays a very small role in the internal affairs of EU countries. Every member state of the EU has it's own elected government the budgets of which far outweigh whatever contributions they make make to the EU. And the each pursue policies that can vary greatly. To ascribe economic problems of those nations to membership in the EU betrays an inability to come to grips with basic arithmetic. And not just with arithmetic.

How does nearly everyone watching this event on their screens differ from any newsworthy event?

It's about impact and publicity. And, I daresay, if all Thunberg did was stay at home and communicate electronically, then she would be castigated for asking other people to make sacrifices that she wouldn't make herself.

More B.S. Under Bill Clinton, taxes were raised enough to have a balanced budget in his final year in office. When George Bush came into office, the Republicans slashed taxes on the wealthy and budget deficits once again became the rule.

But the Republicans want to repeal increased investment in the IRS. A large portion of which will be targeting the tax evading ways of the wealthy.

And why is that significant?

Maybe you could help by traveling in your time machine to the future and bringing back pollution-free technology to the present, Until then, you can't get there from here without using the technology that's available now.

First off, what don't you understand about the fact that whether the documents were classified or not is irrelevant. In both cases, apparently, Trump and Biden violated the rules. And I've got some exciting news for you and similarly qualified legal scholars: Biden was authorized to declassify documents thanks to an executive order from Obama. It's irrelevant, but it is a fact. Fact check: Biden did have the authority to declassify documents as vice president Legal experts told USA TODAY that Biden had the authority to declassify documents as vice president as the result of a 2009 executive order signed by President Barack Obama. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/01/17/fact-check-biden-had-authority-declassify-vice-president/11065345002/ Here's a link to the executive order: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information#:~:text=This order prescribes a uniform,the activities of their Government

What don't you understand about the fact that he's a public official?

You mean like packed up in boxes and stored somewhere. What you don't seem to understand is that you have to prove intent to violate the rules in order to be held criminally responsible. Possession is not enough. That's a very high bar to clear. Very occasionally, there's someone who's mentally defective and gives the government an abundance of the evidence it needs. Someone recently has done just that.

Are you claiming that if it hadn't been for the possiblity of financial gain, he wouldn't have done it? I'm assuming you have some proof of that. Otherwise it would just be another typical case of ascribing ignoble motives without providing any proof.

Can you name any public figure discussed in this forum who cares about the opinions of its members? Why do you think this is relevant?