Isn't this just saying taxation should be optional? Should paying for the military, police or roads be optional? Or are you suggesting the amount you have to pay is fixed and then you get a choice to allocate it to different budget areas you favor.
Pretty sure this is just a PR exercise for the very gullible. Anyone who has seen a real operating theater and had experience of being outside will know this is nonsense. That tent is simply not big enough for one thing.
This should be a reminder that the U.S. cares nothing for human rights violations and whenever it voices such complaints it does so for other selfish Geopolitical reasons that are maybe not revealed. This goes for any of the other Geopolitical powers as well. Let's not be useful idiots.
>Presumably, if the CCP wanted to do so, they could put an end to the groups shipping this deadly substance into the United States.
Presumably, if the United States wanted to do so, they could put an end to the groups shipping this deadly substance from the China.
Just changed the wording a little to show the bias in this sentence. Why do think China would be more successful than the U.S. in prohibiting illegal drugs?
Guns in a home actually lead to greater dangers especially for women. Most people are actually murdered by someone they know, quite often a close relative of friend. It may not feel that way but you are actually safer not owning a gun.
But the U.S. accepts other things that are regulated, a couple of examples:
Speed limits: Speed doesn't cause accidents just people who go faster than their ability to control the vehicle. Many people are sensible and wouldn't do this.
Drugs: Many people can take drugs and enjoy them and not descend into anti-social and criminal behavior.
The "uninhabited farmland" is just an analogy for some area of the economic landscape that when you spend money on it, can absorb labor and return a tangible benefit that is equal or more than what you spend. Maybe for example repairing worn out infrastructure or creating new infrastructure.
>The vast majority of the money the Fed prints goes to financial institutions
You maybe thinking of Quantitative Easing. In which case financial institutions are just incentivized to cash in their Government Bonds, whereby they need to look for some place else to put the money, hence perhaps asset inflation. The Government doesn't just print a whole lot of money and give it away to someone.