Danielle Mead

Are you actually suggesting that?

Honestly, act blue is the worst. I have stopped giving to all liberal candidates and causes that use it because it means act blue will share my info with a million candidates running for Congress in states i don't live in.

Wait, are they getting rid of the hotline generally? Or are they not just going to take calls from lgbtq youth?

That's gorgeous!

Yeah, what is up with that? The sparrows in my yard gang up on each other like a prison yard fight.

I won $15 in a bowling tournament last night!

And the thousands of companies like me that sell services to those small businesses. If they start closing up, there will be a big trickle down effect to service providers.

There's no such thing as an illegal idea when you are governed by the first amendment.

And now small businesses REALLY can't plan ahead.

Let us not forget, corporations are people too. Thanks Mitt Romney.

Wasn't the deadline set by Congress? What actual authority does he have to keep extending it?

This is all an effort to consolidate wealth at the top of the economic food chain. Kill off small businesses, destroy any capital owned by middle and lower class people so that mega companies and the ultra rich can buy it all up for pennies on the dollar. We're heading towards Rollerball, people.

Welcome to gen x.

Since the wealthy are going to clean up buying stocks at a low, why should they get tax cuts too? Isn't one or the other enough?

If the grand plan was to privatize social security and have people invest in the stock market instead, they're not doing a great job showing that's viable.

These tariffs are a regressive tax. Small businesses and poorer people will be much more affected than large companies and wealthy Americans who can absorb higher costs. This is going to kill so many independent retailers.

We had coed bathrooms in college almost 30 years ago. No problems whatsoever except having to listen to the occasional sex in the shower. Parents got used to it pretty quickly when visiting.

New fire maps put nearly 4 million Californians in hazardous zones With a few notable areas where the orange and red tide receded, like the hills above Berkeley and Oakland, territory deemed “high” or “very high” hazard exploded across the state, increasing by 168% s...

Newly updated maps show how much of California is in a high fire zone. It's time to rethink zoning in these areas, from the state level to the local level.
calmatters.org/housing/2025...

Democrats need a project 2029 to present a clear vision for America's future.

It sounds like you believe that the only solution is building more units, even if they are all too weekending for most people. I just don't believe that, sorry. I am not against building but it needs to be a more balanced approach to avoid displacing people who already live in affordable units.

I'm only talking about multi family. If you were to build a million units, yes maybe costs would come down. But that is impossible in the short term. All we're doing is building housing that people can't afford *now*. Any lower costs won't be felt for decades.

You're talking about long term housing price increases being less. That may be true but it doesn't help actual people living in affordable units now that are being torn down to build units they can't afford.

Building more market rate housing doesn't lower costs of existing housing. Ask anyone living in an apartment in any major city if their rent has gone down or if they were able to find cheaper housing than their current rent without moving out of the city. The answer will be no.

It doesn't in enough of a measurable way that makes housing actually affordable for real people. Not in the short term during an individual's lifetime.

Again, we disagree on our approach to housing. That's fine. But I don't think this conversation is productive any more.

I'm not suggesting public housing. I'm saying that governments can provide some subsidies to developers so they can make larger and more affordable units. And developers can make slightly less profit. It's no different than health insurance.

Ultimately there are two ways to approach housing and you and I are on opposite sides. That's fine, we dont have to agree. I will never be on board with turning ever city into NYC and forcing every American to live their entire life in a small apartment.

There needs to be government subsidized affordable housing. Not everything needs to be about profit. If you are relying on private developers, you'll be dead before the price of housing comes down.

Unfortunately most of the new state development laws don't require any affordable units. Which is a huge missed opportunity and makes many of us believe that these laws are really just about enriching developer pockets, not providing housing.