It costs NY taxpayers $500,000.00 per day to educate this 10 year old

I hear there's a pleasant, quiet little 10 yo New York kid who costs a lot to educate. There has been a lot of talk on here about the cost of providing school meals for UK kids. It has attracted comments like "some people want something for nothing! ... or "some people want it given to them on a  plate". Well this US family alone will cost the city c. $183 milion per year for their son's schooling.  

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/20/trump-family-security-new-york-palm-beach-taxes

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Yup.


 Not his fault of course. His mother  refused point blank to move and be with POTUS in the WH, even though there are excellent schools there too. After all Ivanka had no hestitation uprooting her entire family and moving lock stock & barrel to Washington - and she did not even have to, cos no one elected her.  So what's stopping Mrs Trump??

 

I made a comment about giving disadvantaged people in society a helping hand and saw some really mean comments flying around,  in response.  If the hard of thinking were not so busy focusing resentfully on the petty amounts spent giving those at those at the bottom of the pile a helping hand, they'd be aware of where the real bulk of the money goes.  


Oh btw one hopes that the young lad turns out to be an absolute genius. An A+ in all his subjects would be a fair return for the $183million per year the city's residents spend on his education.

Though there are two different countries involved here, capitalism works the same way everywhere ie a few at the top of the ladder with all sorts of safety nets to help them even when they fail dismally (look how failed bankers were rewarded.) ... and a whole lot of people flailing hopelessly at the bottom, trying to get a foothold on the bottom rung of the ladder.

Jules wrote:So what's stopping Mrs Trump??

As I suggested on another thread, Donald frequently wets the bed.

Now she has the run of the NY penthouse all to herself.  Must be heaven.  She didn't choose to move away from her own chosen home...he chose to run off to Washington.  As Tank Jackson said in Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle: "In the end, the universe tends to unfold as it should."

The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

Yes, but Melania is using the boy's schooling as an excuse for staying in NYC, keeping the Trump Tower penthouse up and running.

I wish she'd just come clean: she's married to a fat-ass pig.  He's the closest thing we've had to William Howard Taft since 1913.  That's what is costing all this money.

"Though there are two different countries involved here, capitalism works the same way everywhere ie a few at the top of the ladder with all sorts of safety nets to help them even when they fail dismally (look how failed bankers were rewarded.) ... and a whole lot of people flailing hopelessly at the bottom, trying to get a foothold on the bottom rung of the ladder."

Indeed. But you're not talking about capitalism, you're talking about corporatism.

Capitalists who risk their money on things the market doesn't want or, who participate in fraud, should be rewarded with losses, not piles of loot stolen by government thugs.

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

Yes... and it seems that the types of people who are moaning about the costs are the same types of people who are up there protesting and causing the costs...!

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

Yes, but Melania is using the boy's schooling as an excuse for staying in NYC, keeping the Trump Tower penthouse up and running.

I wish she'd just come clean: she's married to a fat-ass pig.  He's the closest thing we've had to William Howard Taft since 1913.  That's what is costing all this money.

That's not the only purpose of Trump Tower though.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes, but Melania is using the boy's schooling as an excuse for staying in NYC, keeping the Trump Tower penthouse up and running.

I wish she'd just come clean: she's married to a fat-ass pig.  He's the closest thing we've had to William Howard Taft since 1913.  That's what is costing all this money.

That's not the only purpose of Trump Tower though.

It is the one purpose of Trump Tower that is costing the US and NYC all that money to guard and surveil, however.  The Trumps are requiring the government to foot the bill for security on three homes: Trump Tower, Mar a Lago and the White House.  

The Obama's put their home in Kenwood in mothballs while they lived in the White House.

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

It's about the cost of protecting the mum and son in the tower whilst they live separately in NY, from Trump who lives in washington. Two sets of security bills,  instead of one bill if the whole family had lived under one roof in washington. If he moved school it would instantly decimate that astronomical bill.


And you know that time when I said Trump had a meltdown reaction when Obama won the last election and you claimed you did not see any meltdown. (I wasn't even speaking to you at the time) Well he DID have a massive twitter meltdown. I don't care if you saw it or not.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

Yes... and it seems that the types of people who are moaning about the costs are the same types of people who are up there protesting and causing the costs...!

Isn't this the sort of reply that has raggamuffin squealing about "tag teaming, tag teaming" like a shrill immature child?  You both tag team constantly all over the place, but her myopic eyes only notices it when others do it.


You can see that the cost is astronomical, Tommy. It is because the mum refuses point blank to shift her ass to be next to her husband. Nothing to do with any "types of people" protesting. All types of people got together for a couple of protests, that is long since over, What has that got to do with Mrs Trump refusing to shift her ass to live with her husband?

The article specifically mentions huge costs of policing protests...

Also... 'tag teaming' is when posters gang up with abuse against others... not when one poster happens to reply to/agree with another in a non abusive fashion that is on topic...

Apart from a couple of big protests in January, there have been no reports of any more. It is the presence of the first family members in the tower that hikes up the bill.  How ignorant to say that no one else complains about this bill except the ones who "cause it."

There is a lot that both  Mrs Trump and her husband could do to slash the bill. If she is adamant about not leaving NY, she could even rent a secure home in a quiter part of the city to allow  the boy to continue his schooling.

Tommy Monk wrote:Also... 'tag teaming' is when posters gang up with abuse against others... not when one poster happens to reply to/agree with another in a non abusive fashion that is on topic...

Don't explain to me what TT is! I've only got to make ONE, one-off reply to someone who has actually spoken directly to me and she starts squealing about tag teaming.

I mentioned the cost of security and you said the ones who mention the cost are the ones who caused it. You were slagging me off.

No reports of protests doesn't necessarily mean no protests...


The claimed costs are also dubious...

Jules wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Also... 'tag teaming' is when posters gang up with abuse against others... not when one poster happens to reply to/agree with another in a non abusive fashion that is on topic...

Don't explain to me what TT is! I've only got to make ONE, one-off reply to someone who has actually spoken directly to me and she starts squealing about tag teaming.

I mentioned the cost of security and you said the ones who mention the cost are the ones who caused it. You were slagging me off.

No... I was talking generally... not about you personally...!

You were still wrong. The reason for the high cost is because of the stubborn intransigence of the Flotus. You never put the blame where it belongs. Look at the way you sat there inventing all sorts of excuses for killer Tommy Mair. But thankfully most folk are wise to your daft games. Goodnight.

Don't be an idiot... the op article clearly says that protesters caused much of the costs in policing... and regardless of that, wherever else she was with the kid would have similar costs attached for general security that would normally be provided ...

Read the article... Obama cost over $1million just going to one green energy conference... the wife and daughters cost over $200,000 going on a mini ski break in aspen...

If you are going to start moaning about costs, at least be consistent in moaning about all the presidents and their families... and even all the other senior staff and their families too... not just the ones who you don't like...!!!


And... don't you live in Canada anyway...!?

So none of any of it even affects you directly anyway...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:Don't be an idiot... the op article clearly says that protesters caused much of the costs in policing... and regardless of that, wherever else she was with the kid would have similar costs attached for general security that would normally be provided ...

Read the article... Obama cost over $1million just going to one green energy conference... the wife and daughters cost over $200,000 going on a mini ski break in aspen...

If you are going to start moaning about costs, at least be consistent in moaning about all the presidents [/u]and their families... and even all the other senior staff and their families too... not just the ones who you don't like...!!!

And... don't you live in Canada anyway...!?

So none of any of it even affects you directly anyway...!?

That's the point.  This thread is about consistency. Some people moaned their heads off about how much security of Obama administration cost when in fact it did not even come close to how much the Trump administration has already costed, 3 months in. The figures can be found, for the hard of thinking.

This site is for commenting about global events. What affects members directly is irrelevant.

Jules wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Yes... and it seems that the types of people who are moaning about the costs are the same types of people who are up there protesting and causing the costs...!

Isn't this the sort of reply that has raggamuffin squealing about "tag teaming, tag teaming" like a shrill immature child?  You both tag team constantly all over the place, but her myopic eyes only notices it when others do it.


You can see that the cost is astronomical, Tommy. It is because the mum refuses point blank to shift her ass to be next to her husband. Nothing to do with any "types of people" protesting. All types of people got together for a couple of protests, that is long since over, What has that got to do with Mrs Trump refusing to shift her ass to live with her husband?

I thought you understood what tag-teaming was - it seems you don't.

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The article isn't about schooling, it's about the cost of protecting Trump Tower.

It's about the cost of protecting the mum and son in the tower whilst they live separately in NY, from Trump who lives in washington. Two sets of security bills,  instead of one bill if the whole family had lived under one roof in washington. If he moved school it would instantly decimate that astronomical bill.


And you know that time when I said Trump had a meltdown reaction when Obama won the last election and you claimed you did not see any meltdown. (I wasn't even speaking to you at the time) Well he DID have a massive twitter meltdown. I don't care if you saw it or not.

I have no idea why you added that to your post, and I have no recollection of the incident.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

It's about the cost of protecting the mum and son in the tower whilst they live separately in NY, from Trump who lives in washington. Two sets of security bills,  instead of one bill if the whole family had lived under one roof in washington. If he moved school it would instantly decimate that astronomical bill.


And you know that time when I said Trump had a meltdown reaction when Obama won the last election and you claimed you did not see any meltdown. (I wasn't even speaking to you at the time) Well he DID have a massive twitter meltdown. I don't care if you saw it or not.

I have no idea why you added that to your post,




and I have no recollection of the incident.

This is the second time that I have mentioned something that you said, where you claim not to remember. It's not your fault if you cannot remember saying something, but I hope you don't for one minute think it's a valid defence. Not being able to remember saying something does not mean that you did not say it.

Let me jog your memory. I mentioned about Trump's meltdown in a post, a few weeks ago. I wasn't even speaking to you at all, but you jumped in to say you could not remember him having a meltdown. You said it in a sarky way as if you thought I made the whole thing up. I did not make it up and the guessing game thread that I made is my PROOF.

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I have no idea why you added that to your post,




and I have no recollection of the incident.

This is the second time that I have mentioned something that you said, where you claim not to remember. It's not your fault if you cannot remember saying something, but I hope you don't for one minute think it's a valid defence. Not being able to remember saying something does not mean that you did not say it.

Let me jog your memory. I mentioned about Trump's meltdown in a post, a few weeks ago. I wasn't even speaking to you at all,    but you jumped in to say you could not remember him having a meltdown. You said it in a sarky way as if you thought I made the whole thing up. I did not make it up and the guessing game thread that I made is my PROOF.

What guessing game thread, and proof of what?

If you want to accuse me of something, provide a link to the thread in question. It doesn't sound like a serious thing, but you mentioned it for some bizarre reason.

Raggamuffin wrote:

What guessing game thread, and proof of what?

I gave you the title of the thread so it would have been dead easy to do a quick search but in any case the thread was still scrolling at the time(it still is, even now!!)

You'd jumped into my post to say that this guy did not have a meltdown. He did have one and my the thread contains proof of it. You were the one who parachuted in, out of nowhere. For someone whose catchphrase is ''Keep your beak out'' you sure stick yours in a lot. Lol.

Anyhow this is it > >
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20307-guessing-game-guess-who-said-these-words#392275


-

Raggamuffin wrote: It doesn't sound like a serious thing, but you mentioned it for some bizarre reason.

Nothing on forums is 'a serious thing' or a crucial thing anyway. Forums are not important in the scheme of things, just somewhere people meet to swap opinions. Just a hobby. Over & out.

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What guessing game thread, and proof of what?

I gave you the title of the thread so it would have been dead easy to do a quick search but in any case the thread was still scrolling at the time(it still is, even now!!)

You'd jumped into my post to say that this guy did not have a meltdown. He did have one and my the thread contains proof of it. You were the one who parachuted in, out of nowhere. For someone whose catchphrase is ''Keep your beak out'' you sure stick yours in a lot. Lol.

Anyhow this is it > >
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20307-guessing-game-guess-who-said-these-words#392275


-

Where is the thread where I allegedly said Trump didn't have a meltdown?

Did you start the guessing thread just to have a go at me?

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote: It doesn't sound like a serious thing, but you mentioned it for some bizarre reason.

Nothing on forums is 'a serious thing' or a crucial thing anyway. Forums are not important in the scheme of things, just somewhere people meet to swap opinions. Just a hobby.  Over & out.

You seem to be taking it very seriously - to the extent of starting another thread about it. I don't even remember it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

Nothing on forums is 'a serious thing' or a crucial thing anyway. Forums are not important in the scheme of things, just somewhere people meet to swap opinions. Just a hobby.  Over & out.

You seem to be taking it very seriously - to the extent of starting another thread about it. I don't even remember it.

I tried to follow the way the thread was going....even followed the link, still as clear as mud.

Syl wrote:
I tried to follow the way the thread was going....even followed the link, still as clear as mud.

This thread is not connected to the other thread I showed in the link. The other thread was for Raggamuffin only.

Raggamuffin wrote:
You seem to be taking it very seriously - to the extent of starting another thread about it. I don't even remember it.

It is no more or less ''serious'' than any other topic on any forum.  Ditch the ''serious'' labels, there is no need for them.  

BOTTOM LINE: contrary to what you said, the guy DID have a ranting meltdown and I have clearly demonstrated this in the  link. And that's that. http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20307-guessing-game-guess-who-said-these-words#392271

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:
I tried to follow the way the thread was going....even followed the link, still as clear as mud.

This thread is not connected to the other thread I showed in the link. The other thread was for Raggamuffin only.

Raggamuffin wrote:
You seem to be taking it very seriously - to the extent of starting another thread about it. I don't even remember it.

It is no more or less ''serious'' than any other topic on any forum.  Ditch the ''serious'' labels, there is no need for them.  

BOTTOM LINE: contrary to what you said,   the guy DID have a ranting meltdown and I have clearly demonstrated this in the  link. And that's that. http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20307-guessing-game-guess-who-said-these-words#392271

So you keep saying, but I don't remember saying that he didn't. I might have done, but unless you link to where I apparently said it, I still won't remember. So what if I did say that? Was it worth starting a brand new thread?

You are taking it very seriously.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You seem to be taking it very seriously - to the extent of starting another thread about it. I don't even remember it.

I tried to follow the way the thread was going....even followed the link, still as clear as mud.

Jules claims that I said Trump didn't have a meltdown, which I don't remember saying, and then to prove that he did, she started another thread. I have no idea why.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

I tried to follow the way the thread was going....even followed the link, still as clear as mud.

Jules claims that I said Trump didn't have a meltdown, which I don't remember saying, and then to prove that he did, she started another thread. I have no idea why.

I don't remember reading a thread about Trumps meltdown, mind you I do avoid threads about him most of the time so that's not suprising.
I read the link.....it meant nothing to me but reading Jules reply I don't suppose it was meant to, it was obviously for you.