the-pi-guy said:
>benefits Illegals aren't getting massive benefits. >sanctuary city Are set up so that illegal immigrants can call on crime. For example if an illegal immigrant sees someone getting murdered, they can call the police without worrying about repercussions.
And I'm not registered as a Democrat.
Middle class would get taxed for the healthcare, but it'd be replacing their existing healthcare costs.
Cost of living is so high because there literally isn't enough houses for the people in the state. It's not purely because taxes are high.
>dems want to little to no limit on the number of people False. Just because dems don't think spending billions on a border wall is worth it, doesn't mean they want everyone to come over. Most illegal immigrants aren't going to be stopped by a wall.
Unlike the US, Mexico has a universal healthcare system.
Yes all those other social states with low unemployment.
Seeing as you: -don't understand my ideology, shown by such beliefs as: "dems want to little to no limit on the number of people entering" -are vastly overstating the welfare/illegal immigration problems I would say you're the one in need of doing some research.
In the real world though, there are only about 11 million illegal immigrants and that number has been consistently falling over the past 10 years. And they aren't being given massive amounts of money.
It's not the poor, it's not the illegal immigrants. It is the elderly by far.
>what the democrats are proposing is far more ambitious and generous than what other countries provide How so? |
Considering the size of the state there is plenty of space for housing and apartments, just look at countries that have more population in a smaller area.
Hiku said:
It's because they're the only ones that can have that procedure. Considering the risks for women with birth control, and pregnancy, it would be the more reasonable alternative.
If you're talking about planned pregnancies, then I suppose I can understand the reasoning. |
Yes as long as we accept that both are equally responsible for taking care of their interest and in the case of sex men wanting to use condom and that woman takes pill, while woman takes the pill and insist man use condom. Plus of course if you want to be a bachelor fucking all around certainly vasectomy would be a minimum.
Hiku said:
It's pregnancies as a result of unprotected sex, and it should all be in my previous posts. But to summarize: Now give me your Soul Eater. |
Errr the man can't make a woman pregnant when she can't make herself, so just because male can make a woman pregnant at any time he have sex that woman would still need to be during fertile days (which isn't just 2 days a month anyway, it is about 3x as much because semen survives inside the womb). And unless you are considering odd cases of a man that have sex each day with a different woman and all of them are in fertile window and accept to do without protection but only after forcefully insistence then that would be a very odd claim from you.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."