Would a graph help? https://www.statista.com/chart/19418/divergence-of-ocean-temperatures-from-20th-century-average/

An excuse for what? I think I misunderstood your point.

I’m still very capable of caring for myself, but I’ve also been caring for my mother since my father passed. It’s very difficult financially in the US. It would certainly cost less to get her into a nursing home than having to rent a two bedroom. Most people can’t even afford to do it now. The US is in a sad state.

My concern on that front is trust. After electing Trump, Biden, Trump, our allies see the US as a rocking ship. Our allies’ trust in us will take more than a term to regain.

That’s true, although this administration is perfectly timed to siphon off the largest wealth transfer in US history with the demise of the boomers.

I’m sure my daughter would want to. The problem is it’s completely unrealistic in the US. When I’m too old to care for myself, I’m going to insist on a nursing home. Hell, the LAN parties are going to be great by then.

Diapers or catheters are used by some.

Probably the same reason we had 40+ tornadoes, huge hailstorms, floods, and drought-enabled wildfires in six adjacent states within 48 hours. Anthropogenic climate change is real, whether you believe in it or not.

The upside is now farmers won’t have to worry about what to do with the crop surplus from trade wars, dismantled USAID, and defunded school lunch program.

Exactly right. He should have been more compelling with his peers over the dangers of a shutdown. The dissent just gave people the impression of weakness.

Thanks! That was a well written breakdown for sure. The irony is I really dislike Schumer. Everyone else dropped out of the primary, so he was mo only option. I’m even less fond of defending a moderate standpoint, but I’ll advocate for fact over opinion, and this was simply not the leverage people make it out to be.

The alternative would be a much faster replacement of the non-essential workforce. I’m not defending it. I’m stating Schumer’s reasoning because I’m sick of people painting it as if we somehow had full control of a situation and gave it away. It’s just not that simple.

I’m not. I’m saying it was a lose/lose. People who make it seem like leverage don’t understand the effects of a shutdown and how the EO would allow Trump to complete that massive step in no time.

I’m not a fan of Schumer, or any centrists for that matter. Every candidate besides Schumer and Gillibrand dropped out before the primary. I’m hoping AOC runs a NY Senate bid in 2028 so we can finally get the deadwood out.

I wholeheartedly wanted to understand your opinion. I’m no fan of Schumer. Everyone withdrew but him and Gillibrand in the primary, so I didn’t have much of a choice. Regardless, he’s my Senator, and I message and call his office often. I appreciate your point about the EO. At the end of the day, it really is no different than the others being challenged in court. That’s a valid point I’ll be taking up with his office later today. Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. Sorry if I frustrated you.

Those terminations are either of probationary employees (less than two years in role), or are currently being challenged by the courts. Project 2025 outlines a complete replacement of all hired federal employees with loyalists.

I understand the riders aren’t temporary, but the budget itself is. That means there will be another chance at a shutdown in September. I don’t need you to explain how this works. I need you to explain why you think it’s a better choice to give Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees than to have control of the budget. It’s your opinion that I find elusive, not the facts.

This isn’t a popularity contest. Handing Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees under EO 14210 would expedite Project 2025. It was a lose/lose situation.

So you agree that it’s temporary? Isn’t that the point you challenged?

Again, it is not a lie. EO 14210 provides Trump with the ability to terminate non-essential government employees if any of three conditions are not met, and funding is one of them.

Read it for yourself: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/don-t-use-shutdown-plans-to-slash-the-federal-workforce

What loss alone? Again, be specific. The alternative was a shutdown.

Then why does this only fund the government through September, rather than the full calendar?

Not at all. My point is we have a chance to replace these people every two or four years in the primaries, but only ~20% of us actually vote in them.