Which stated ideal says that she cannot pay for a haircut and dye job in NYC out of her own pocket? Please provide a specific quote from AOC herself.
I am not going to hunt for a specific quote, as it does not hinge on a single statement by her. But she is big on things like income inequality while living in up on taxpayer dime.
My guess is that she is a few million short of being in the top 1% of earners in the US, but I am amenable to being corrected.
Turns out we are both wrong, but you are more wrong than I. 1% cutoff is
~$328k individual income and she makes ~$174k as a Congresswoman. So certainly not "millions" worth of difference. She is easily in the top 5% though.
Others have already noted that $260 for a women's cut, styling, and dye job with low-lights in NYCC is not out of the ordinary.
Nobody said it was out of the ordinary.
Condos costing >$5,000,000 are not out of the ordinary in NYC either, but that doesn't mean regular people, that she claims to represent, can afford them.
Please provide evidence that the amount she paid is overly expensive for those services in NYC.
NYC has Supercuts. They offer hair color and are much more reasonably priced. But they are not a fancy salon fit for an aspiring socialist apparatchik.
Seems to have more to do with your obsessions.
As of this writing, this thread had 3,112 posts, 730 (or ~24%) were made by lpetrich. I do not think I am the obsessed one.
On the other hand, if you weren't trying to tell AOC how to spend her money, perhaps no one would be making such observations about the way you spend your money. I believe that was my point to begin with.
I doubt it. Hookers are mentioned in a sizable fraction of threads I post in in order to attack me on a personal basis when the poster in question runs out of arguments.
Free hair cuts are not available to everyone either,
If you have a significant other, you can buy some clippers and cut each other's hair.
just to socialists like Mitch McConnel, apparently.
Your place of business having a barbershop is not 'socialism', but as we will see later, you have a major comprehension problem as to that word.
You shouldn't be suggesting anything about how she spends her own money, because it is her money and it is none of your business what she does with it.
She is ostensibly a public servant. My tax moneys pay her salary.
I'm not sure why you aren't concerned about Mitch McConnel abusing his position as a Senator to obtain free socialist haircuts, though.
Again with Mitch? Have you seen the guy? His haircut is like a $15 Great Clips haircut and certainly not a >$300 fancy salon haircut. Also, if you are getting so obsessed with him and his hair, at least learn to write his name.
Prove it. Show us evidence that the most expensive cut, style, and dye with low-lights in NYC is $280.
I did not say it was the
most expensive option, but it is certainly in the upper end. And lowlights or whatever she got are certainly not a necessity and not even noticable in the photos of her I've seen.
Looks all a uniform shade to me. And doesn't she naturally have dark hair color? Why waste time and money coloring it? Not to mention all the carbon emissions of producing and transporting the dyes. I guess I will never understand women ...
But do
you have any evidence that this price is anywhere close to the median price in NYC?
Way to cherry pick. Please take note of the very next sentence:
I did not "cherry pick". I posted the definition.
Wikipedia said:
In the term democratic socialism, the adjective democratic is added and used to distinguish democratic socialists from Marxist–Leninist inspired socialism which to many is viewed as being undemocratic or authoritarian in practice.
Yes, Democratic Socialism and Marxist-Leninist Socialism are distinct, but they are
both types of socialism.
I do not understand how you can have so many difficulties understanding such a simple concept.
If I say that Italian sausage is a type of sausage, that is true even if you find a sentence that says that Italian sausage is not a chorizo sausage. They are both types of sausage, just as much these two types of socialism are both socialist.
Hmmm, seems like Wikipedia does actually note a difference. That is unless you want to redefine "distinguish" as well.
It notes a difference between one
type of socialism and another
type of socialism. Both are
types of socialism though.
Please provide evidence that AOC is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a Democratic Socialists of America member. Here’s what that means.
Just two sentences away from where you apparently stopped reading:
I have not stopped reading, I just understand things like subsets.
Wikipedia said:
Democratic socialists oppose the Stalinist political system and the Soviet-type economic system, rejecting the perceived authoritarian form of governance and highly centralised command economy that took form in the Soviet Union and other Marxist–Leninist states in the early 20th century.
According to your source, it seems that overtly supporting Karl Marx is not necessary to be a Democratic Socialist.
Stalinism is a subset of Marxism. Marxism-Leninism is a subset of Marxism. Marxism-Leninism is a further development of Marxism by VI Lenin, Vladimir Ilych Ulyanov. Somebody can subscribe to Marxism without subscribing to the Leninist developments, much less Stalinist ones.
Unless we actually read the source you provided which states, as shown above, that the phrase is one that is used to distinguish those who apply the label to themselves from actual socialists.
It seems we have both read it, but only I have actually comprehended it. The article clearly defines Democratic Socialism as a type of socialism, contrasted with Social Democracy, which is not.
#Women4Climate #TheFutureWeWant https://t.co/xHkQW2XAoY" / Twitter
https://t.co/9r6BZu0cMw" / Twitter
