657
Utah study on trans youth care extremely inconvenient for politicians who ordered it
(www.motherjones.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 May 2025
657 points (98.4% liked)
News
29646 readers
2531 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Doesn't matter, they'll ignore it or write it off as leftist propaganda despite being the ones that ordered the study. They don't need reasons to hate as long as it keeps the sheep voting for them.
When Roald Reagan pushed tax cuts for the rich George W. Bush called it 'voo-doo economics.'
In almost five decades, the taxcuts have never paid for themselves as reagan promised.
Funny since they both were propped up by the heritage foundation.
As Henry Ford said of the Model T. "You can get it any color you want, as long as it's black."
You can have any candidate you want, as long as it's a Conservative.
*regressive
Reagan was president 1981-1989. During years 1981-2023, there were only 5 years (1982, 1991, 2008, 2009, 2020) where US growth was less than 1%. I don't know enough to say whether that's thanks to or despite Reagan, but he sure didn't destroy the economy.
The word "economy" can mean different things to different people.
Before Reagan became President, 'middle class' was defined as one Union job supporting a family of four. In those days $1 million was considered a vast fortune. By the time Bush Sr. left office 'middle class' meant both parents working to keep the house going and $1 million was what a rich guy paid for a party.
i dont feel like rebutting but i do feel like saying that Reagan completely ignored the AIDS epidemic and let thousands and thousands of his constituents die
I'm not saying Reagan wasn't a bad president, just focusing on his effects on the economy. That doesn't excuse his other failures.
Have you seen a debt to gdp ratio?
2001 came vanishingly close, at 1.2%, and mostly because of timing and enormous state intervention.
And those were all famously inconsequential. Certainly, none of them broke critical industrial centers, forcing large scale consolidation and outsourcing.
The banking, automotive, airline, tech, and manufacturing sectors are - I think we can all agree - far more robust and prolific today than they were 40 years ago. So many consumer choices. All of them excellent products that never catastrophically fail on a routine basis. Certainly nothing that requires constant state bailouts and protectionists actions to preserve.
Giving one man all the credit for what has been a sizeable intergenerational ideological crusade seems naive.
I think there are a long line of people you could say "Thank you" to, from Jack Welch to Bill Gross to Alan Greenspan to Jeffrey Epstein.
You dropped this:
/s