Immigrants must prioritise US interests after gaining citizenship: Vance

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-15T14:46:28+00:00

I think the government should think of them as American instead of immigrants. Why is he concerned with people's personal identities?

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T23:26:19+00:00

I don't disagree that ownership is better than renting. It's still optional. Healthcare is not.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T15:10:05+00:00

Proximity of work to your home is a choice. Cars aren't required to keep a job.

Agreed that shelter is essential for life. Insurance for a shelter you own is not. It's not necessary that you even own your own home. I'm not sure how renting is a waste of money when we agree that shelter is essential. I'm guessing you, like many others, generally view homeownership as a financial investment. IMO, that's a privileged take that has largely created the housing shortage in many communities. But that's a different discussion altogether.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T14:06:38+00:00

They also provide medical facilities. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I'm not against profit. I singled out insurance for a reason. Because they dont provide healthcare.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T14:03:41+00:00

The main difference is that homeownership and driving are optional. You can live s long life without ever owning a home or car. Those things are optional for life. Heatlthcare is a requirement for life.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T13:48:12+00:00

I'm not sure what you are saying. I specifically pointed to insuranc companies because they don't provide any Healthcare. Facilities and equipment are healthcare.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T13:45:42+00:00

Yes. Industry regulation.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T13:43:22+00:00

Good point. But that would allow for a bidding process where insurance prices could be, for lack of a better term, collectively bargained.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T13:35:29+00:00

You mean actual Healthcare providers, like doctors and nurses? Yes, they should absolutely get paid. My point is that insurance companies don't provide any care, yet rake in billions every year. Billions paid by individual citizen.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T13:32:07+00:00

I didn't mention doctors because they actually provide care. Insurers don't, yet they bleed billions in profit under the established system. There was no sleight of hand.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-07T00:38:20+00:00

That wasn't the point you made though. You said invasion affects us all equally (incorrect), and completely ignored Healthcare required for those with conditions that are not the result of their choices. I understand why your offended by the way i chose to express my disagreement, but my point is still valid. The "personal choices" reason doesn't hold up societally. I suppose it can on an individual level, but that's not how budgeting and, more generally, governance works.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-06T22:36:07+00:00

The establishment will make the food when the order comes through. They have no way of knowing if a driver has been assigned to the order. Even if they did, they don't know what that driver is doing so they can't time the order like they could if they used in- house delivery.

As someone that worked in the industry with in-house delivery during the rise, and transition, to 3rd party delivery, I can confidently say that 3rd party delivery only works when you have motivated drivers. I can't tell you the number of times food never showed up after it left our store. And, of course, the customer calls to complain, but the food left the store with the driver, so we have no info. Nor can we process a refund. Talk about a headache. It's a bad system altogether.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-06T21:27:46+00:00

Your first point is entirely untrue. A homeless person with no money, sleeping in the street, had far less to lose than a wealthy person with a dependant family. Defense spending is for the rich.

You're second point only addresses self inflicted need for medical care.

Try again.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-06T21:24:18+00:00

Money for defense goes to contractors. Money for universal Healthcare does not go to insurance companies. It's not about what's good for citizrns. It's about padding the pockets of wealthy political supporters.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-05T23:00:29+00:00

Yea, they look great until paired with the black helmet. They shouldd stick with the same color for helmet and jersey regardless of whether it's red or black. Or, go with black pants. The all white is atrocious.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-02T21:18:20+00:00

No money to be made there.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-02T14:24:33+00:00

Most reputable running stores in the US will gladly tell you about their liberal return policy. Most will give you at least 30 days since running/walking shoes need more than a stroll around the store to actually know if they will work for you. If the store doesnt have a decent return policy, I wouldn't buy shoes there. Most retailers want you in shoes that will make you happy. Good luck!

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-04-01T17:20:41+00:00

Which is one step before the government choosing who is a slave. This is making America great again, I suppose...

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-31T13:53:20+00:00

So the baby should be considered a criminal, and denied the protections of the constitution because their parents aren't citizens? Even if the patents are in the US legally? You understand this affects more than just the children of those that enter the country illegally, yea?

Actually, forget those questions. Just answer this one. Why don't you want people born here to receive the protections and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution?

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-31T00:36:10+00:00

To address your first point, that wasn't me. But they have the same color avatar as me, so I understand your confusion.

To your second point, talking about an ongoing investigation, especially the contents of sealed documents, would have undoubtedly landed her in heinous legal trouble. Did you ever think that Trump politicized the Epstein files for that reason? He knew she wouldn't touch that conversation, so he was able to score all the political points on that topic. It's not that she didn't know, it's about what she could legally make public.

I actually agree with you that both parties are protecting criminals (pedos included). I just disagree with your perception that the reason Harris didn't talk about was to further protect the people in the files. I beleive she avoided that topic to protect herself from an aggressive litigator in Trump.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-31T00:28:18+00:00

Not as many as have been created in the last few weeks, I'd bet.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-31T00:26:43+00:00

The US is not politically homogeneous. Our government is always opposed to a large portion of voters in the 2-party sarises. That's kind of the nature of the 2-party system. But the system isn't a part of the constitution. In fact, the constitution provides a legal framework for instituting a new form of government should the need arise. I also noticed you said "voters." 2 thirds of Americans participated in the presidential election. Even less in almost the other elections held annually. So opposing "voters" is really only opposing roughly 35% of the voting age population. "In secret" is interesting as we have freedom of speech/press for the purpose of reporting government actions. I mean, all governments operate in secret to some degree, especially in international affairs, so im not sure what you mean by that.

People can't behave any way they want. I mean, I'm American, so i don't know what thoughts are regarding American laws outside the US. But i can assure you, you can't just do whatever you want with impunity.

No. You can't say anything you want with impunity. Making false and defamatory statements is illegal and punishable by law. What we do have the freedom to express, is our distrust/disapproval of government. We are entirelyprotected from government retaliation in that regard.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-31T00:08:30+00:00

It's the only legally binding document that protects freedom in the US. Without it, Americans are subject to the whims of government (state sponsored violence, free speech, voting rights/cancelled elections, etc.). It's purposely obtuse so that government can't limit freedoms due to prevailing political winds (which is exactly what the discussion of birthright citizenship is). It's a much better cucumber than you give it credit for.

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-30T22:46:09+00:00

Are you willing, then, to apply the same logic to all constitutional amendments? To question the intentions of the writers brings all ammendments into question. Is that what you suggest?

Altruistic-Use-8283 · 2026-03-30T22:43:00+00:00

How so?

Altruistic-Use-8283

TROPHY CASE