instruction:
Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.
question:
Actual reality politics in this country aside (i.e "It's never going to happen"), the Parliamentary systems of Britain, Israel, Japan, Germany etc. where multiple political parties exist and can have an actual 'piece of the action' to the extent of sometimes getting to be in charge of a portion of the actual Governmental Administration or at least real input on some pending legislation or governmental policies is at least superficially attractive.  

The ability to hang up everything to get your own way by one or more minorities is both the strength and the weakness of those systems, however. 

 Just as the 2/3 Senate super-majority requirement for some things is for our system.
answer:
No


question:
Rachael, you're the one who may actually be off a bit and appear to be confusing the PF  (Permanent Fund)  and the PFD (Permanent Fund Dividend. The difference is clear. The Fund itself was/is indeed truly meant to be a rainy-day fund to help support the State when the oil is inevitably gone. A moment of wondrous political clarity and foresight often not seen in our system.  The Dividend (PFD) was intended, at least in part, as a means to keep the pubic involved and monitoring the fund so that later politicians wouldn't figure out a way to get to the principle with no one to say otherwise. In retrospect it has worked just like that though maybe a little better than is healthy. With skin in the game Alaskans decry any attempt to raid the fund as it will have direct impact on them. This is the intended effect. On the downside it has created a bit of an unhealthy entitlement mentality but in general it's worked well. We still have an obligation to future generations.
answer:
No


question:
No wonder (with Envision Eugene) why the single family property values keep climbing, making housing cost LESS affordable, which include rents for the working stiff.
answer:

No