Forever Not Maybe

"The nomination changed everything, maybe forever," says Tom Goldstein, publisher of the popular SCOTUSblog, which extensively covers the Supreme Court. "Republicans nominated this brilliant guy to move the law in this dramatically more conservative direction. Liberal groups turned around and blocked him precisely because of those views. Their fight legitimized scorched-earth ideological wars over nominations at the Supreme Court, and to this day both sides remain completely convinced they were right. The upshot is that we have this ridiculous system now where nominees shut up and don't say anything that might signal what they really think."

Forever Not Maybe

It's actually a year old at this point. It was actually August of 2020, or maybe it was October of 2020. Um, but I don't think that the insights from it are necessarily wrong, that the, the gist is that. Most people expect the sort of during COVID buying behaviors for B2B buyers anyway, to more or less continue, um, when the pandemic is over and a couple of really interesting findings, um, uh, from, from my standpoint anyway, and, and relevant to companies that are selling to small businesses, obviously that's why this article sort of caught my attention.

Greg: your best, the, the, the, the report from, um, uh, about, uh, uh, mobile payments adoption, and sort of a surprising, uh, finding that it wasn't as high as maybe people would have expected from COVID

Mike: Right. Yeah. Although a lot of the failure of uptake was originally due to Walmart and Walgreens fighting this trend. Right. And now I feel like the trend is being fought, not by those folks, but maybe by the MasterCard and visa folks with alternative products.

I don't think this is a math issue. Rather, it is an accountability and trust issue. Should we be asking businesses to grow the General Fund or should we be asking PA businesses to contribute specifically to the expenses related to the infrastructure and services that they impact and that benefit them most? The current CC has identified those as housing, transportation, grade separation, and public safety. Those areas of need will exist forever. But future City Councils are not bound by the promises and assurances that this City Council makes. Ms. Diamond correctly labels the talk about revenue use a "sales pitch". If the revenue from this tax are NOT spent on the identfied areas, and there's NOTHING requiring that they are, the City Manager and a future CC could well return with yet another tax proposal. To be perfectly frank, our current City Manager and the one before him and the long-standing twisted dynamic of City Council being run by the City Manager/Senior Staff (instead of the other way around) is why I think it unwise to enact a general tax.Here's a daunting thought to keep in mind: if the revenue is not spent as promised, the very serious problems that exist in those areas will only worsen. Promises are nothing; this needs to be a specific tax.

And maybe they understand that New York City, cosmopolitan capital of the world, has been turned upside-down, painted blue, transformed into the biggest little town ever, a college cow town with skyscrapers. 041b061a72