re: jeb1145: "STOP THE SPENDING, PERIOD" This is a totally useless suggestion. I do understand your solution, I just have a problem with its consequences... with your solution, anyone that doesn't have enough money for food should just stop eating. This would eventually eliminate their need for food, when they die! Problem solved.
There is a real problem here and spending cuts are certainly a part of the solution, but the problem is more complex than your kindergarten level economics lesson. A balanced approach of reducing costs and raising revenue is what's needed. The solution needs to be specific. I don't have any answers, but I have the questions that need to be answered by the solution. Let's move the level up to at least eighth grade... Exactly where is our money coming from, how and when do we get it? Exactly what are we spending money on now? Can we get a better deal on any of our current spending without sacrificing quality? Is there anything in our budget where the current level of quality is unnecessary? Are we spending money on anything that is non-essential and can be reduced or maybe even eliminated? If we still don't have enough money to pay for everything then how do we raise more money?
My definitions of essential, non-essential and necessary quality will almost certainly differ from yours. I'm sure that we could argue about that for a very long time and never agree, but I hope you can raise your level of thinking to realize that "STOP THE SPENDING, PERIOD" is only a part of the right answer.
If not paying sales tax gives an unfair advantage to Amazon, or if it hurts the state by reducing revenue then the agreement should have never been made. To renege on a deal already made is despicable and totally wrong. Republicans claim to be the reducers of taxes, yet here we are able to see their true colors... claim to reduce taxes and claim to be all about creating jobs while actually raising taxes and stifling job creation and simultaneously reneging on promises already made. Republicans claim to be pro-business but, apparently, only if it helps the businesses that have won their favor. It is so obvious that he who lobbies the hardest (and donates the most to election campaigns) will have the loudest voice, without regard to what is best for the voters or the economy. Lower taxes, smaller government and job creation are all Republican rhetoric, and even outright lies.
The Station fire in Rhode Island, that is being given as a justification for this, was caused by pyrotechnics which ignited flammable sound insulation foam in the walls and ceilings surrounding the stage. Avoiding this kind of tragedy does not require sprinklers... banning indoor fireworks in bars would probably do it. Flammable insulation should also be banned. All of that said, sprinklers still add another level of safety.
Whether you are left or right, wing-nut or sane, if you are not appalled by and condemning this tragedy then you are part of the problem. If you are more worried about your right to bear arms than you are disgusted by this shooting then you are one of many that should not have that right. The right to bear arms carries responsibility with it and if you are too busy defending your rights to see the horror in this, then you are not worthy of free speach or of the right to bear arms.