Heads Up!
 

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

Jim - Shysters and Loogys everywhere.

Heads Up!
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...
Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

Jim - Shysters and Loogys everywhere.


I think she's worth reading... at least one of the the books. As long as you
remember it's fiction and not an economic prescription, they're fine.

Heads Up!
 

On 7-Sep-2010, Jim wrote:

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

Heads Up!
 

In article , says...

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

Jim - Shysters and Loogys everywhere.

Go call someone's wife and say nasty things to her, again.

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 12:32:40 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 7-Sep-2010, Jim wrote:

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

Bedwetters? You must be referring to the beneficiaries of our public
largess, the guys at Goldman Sachs and BP.

I heard they're hurting because they'll have trouble getting new sails
this year and fueling up has become quite spendy.

You one of them?

Heads Up!
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 7-Sep-2010, Jim wrote:

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't
given up.

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 12:32:40 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 7-Sep-2010, Jim wrote:

Somebody posted here saying to read Ayn Rand.
Don't be a fool.
'Nuff said.

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

ayn rand wrote pablum for the intellectually challenged who believe
the easter bunny is real

Heads Up!
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?




Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general, and gut social programs to promote their
ill-advised, Ayn Rand-like philosophy of the free market uber alles. Do your
own research or get your head out of the sand? Where have you been for the
last decade? Have you picked up a newspaper? The Iraq war cost us over $1T
and counting. Ill advised? How about criminally negligent. If you want to
blame a former president, start with Reagan.

And, you're probably going to tell me next that the last crowd of
Republicans are going to make things better by doing the same thing they did
last time they were in power. What else.

Heads Up!
 

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?

Well, well, well... weeeeeellll.. uh, er, it was uh,


....George Bush!!! Yeah, that's the ticket...!!

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't

given up.

When the concepts implied in the writings were in place, the U.S. was
growing exponentially, uneducated millions were making good wages and all
were successful. Now (since the 70's) handouts from the productive minority
(who are now gone) have taken priority, and the masses have to move back to
concrete housing complexes.

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:04:29 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:




Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, Wayne.B wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the

neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?

One way trade agreements that bled all productivity from the U.S., initiated
by Clinton with the most favorite nation status, and NAFTA, originally
promoted by Bush 1. The maniacs however all blame W because they want
higher welfare checks and didn't think it might happen until the current
jackass took office. It WON'T happen (lowest income rate goes up 50% on
January 1, 2011) now either, but the mindless worship will continue. The
key word is mindless.

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

ayn rand wrote pablum for the intellectually challenged who believe
the easter bunny is real

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time, but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

Heads Up!
 

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?




Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general, and gut social programs to promote their
ill-advised, Ayn Rand-like philosophy of the free market uber alles. Do
your own research or get your head out of the sand? Where have you been
for the last decade? Have you picked up a newspaper? The Iraq war cost us
over $1T and counting. Ill advised? How about criminally negligent. If you
want to blame a former president, start with Reagan.

And, you're probably going to tell me next that the last crowd of
Republicans are going to make things better by doing the same thing they
did last time they were in power. What else.

Where is that objective "stated"?

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME
FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours. Automation and
imported materials (such as in the autos you buy) decrease costs; cost has
nothing to do with price, productivity increases as prices remain the same
or increase with the lower cost or labor consumption. Less resources are
used during output, revenue is maintained and profits increase. Increased
productivity has nothing to do with factory rats working harder. In fact,
technology and imports made labor irrelevant.

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:24:30 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME
FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours.

you're missing the point, as usual. you keep pretending the middle
class should reap NO benefits at all from the economy, save slave
labor wages.

AND you keep pretending the rich, by virtue of being rich, DO
contribute something to the economy.

go ahead....prove it.

Automation and
imported materials (such as in the autos you buy) decrease costs; cost has
nothing to do with price, productivity increases as prices remain the same
or increase with the lower cost or labor consumption. Less resources are
used during output, revenue is maintained and profits increase. Increased
productivity has nothing to do with factory rats working harder. In fact,
technology and imports made labor irrelevant.

gee. tell it to the mexicans

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:12:28 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

ayn rand wrote pablum for the intellectually challenged who believe
the easter bunny is real

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time, but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

obviously you've never read a book in general, or ayn rand in
particular

Heads Up!
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

Heads Up!
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 8-Sep-2010, Wayne.B wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but
the

neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?

One way trade agreements that bled all productivity from the U.S.,
initiated
by Clinton with the most favorite nation status, and NAFTA, originally
promoted by Bush 1. The maniacs however all blame W because they want
higher welfare checks and didn't think it might happen until the current
jackass took office. It WON'T happen (lowest income rate goes up 50% on
January 1, 2011) now either, but the mindless worship will continue. The
key word is mindless.

Well, wait a sec. You're a maniac and you don't blame W.

Heads Up!
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 8-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't

given up.

When the concepts implied in the writings were in place, the U.S. was
growing exponentially, uneducated millions were making good wages and all
were successful. Now (since the 70's) handouts from the productive
minority
(who are now gone) have taken priority, and the masses have to move back
to
concrete housing complexes.

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME
FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

You're the slime in this conversation.

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:25:15 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy.

American imperialism in the mid-east to the tune of 3 trillion,
giveaways to the rich to the tune of 1 trillion. Rabid support of the
push for least cost labor that's undermined the US economy and the
entire middle class.

Need more?

Heads Up!
 

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:56:20 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

I have always tried to keep the wolves from the door, fairly
successfully I might add.

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?

Heads Up!
 

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:56:20 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

I have always tried to keep the wolves from the door, fairly
successfully I might add.

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?

She probably got it from Olbermann or Matthews.. They often start
questions or interviews with lies like that, it's just what political
activists do.

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

Heads Up!
 

On 9/9/10 10:08 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:56:20 -0700,
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700,
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

I have always tried to keep the wolves from the door, fairly
successfully I might add.

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?

She probably got it from Olbermann or Matthews.. They often start
questions or interviews with lies like that, it's just what political
activists do.


So early in the am, and you're already under the influence, eh?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Heads Up!
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:56:20 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the
middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

I have always tried to keep the wolves from the door, fairly
successfully I might add.

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?



I guess you never heard of the neocons who were running this country for the
last couple of decades? Their stated plan is to bankrupt the federal
government and make over the country based on their twisted notion of free
market uber alles.

http://www.slate.com/id/2231268/

Heads Up!
 

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:56:20 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the
middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in
the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The
Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.

I have always tried to keep the wolves from the door, fairly
successfully I might add.

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?

She probably got it from Olbermann or Matthews.. They often start
questions or interviews with lies like that, it's just what political
activists do.

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

You probably get your news from Beck/Palin. When is the former and the
republican leadership going to stand up and say no to book burning?

Heads Up!
 

On 9-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?



I guess you never heard of the neocons who were running this country for
the
last couple of decades? Their stated plan is to bankrupt the federal
government and make over the country based on their twisted notion of free

market uber alles.

You were correct - he gets this kind of rant from the idiot box. This is
what happens when you have no useful skills or education.

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

One way trade agreements that bled all productivity from the U.S.,
initiated
by Clinton with the most favorite nation status, and NAFTA, originally
promoted by Bush 1. The maniacs however all blame W because they want
higher welfare checks and didn't think it might happen until the current
jackass took office. It WON'T happen (lowest income rate goes up 50% on
January 1, 2011) now either, but the mindless worship will continue.
The
key word is mindless.

Well, wait a sec. You're a maniac and you don't blame W.

By himself, no - there's been no one in the executive branch (except Cheney)
worth the office since Truman said "bomb the *******s." Congress has long
been an embarassment - it truly reflects the population.

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, jps wrote:

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy.

American imperialism in the mid-east to the tune of 3 trillion,
giveaways to the rich to the tune of 1 trillion. Rabid support of the
push for least cost labor that's undermined the US economy and the
entire middle class.

Need more?

Take an English class (EASL??) - those were simply vague accusations. -
Unless, by actions, are you referring to rightard Clinton's most favored
nation status for red China or NAFTA?

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours.

you're missing the point, as usual. you keep pretending the middle
class should reap NO benefits at all from the economy, save slave
labor wages.

OK, I agree with you - your elected government should control your wages -
how much should you be paid? How much should you pay for an automobile, a
toaster, cheap wine and lottery tickets?

Heads Up!
 

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time,
but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

obviously you've never read a book in general, or ayn rand in
particular

Perhaps I should read Buckwheat's books?

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 18:50:14 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours.

you're missing the point, as usual. you keep pretending the middle
class should reap NO benefits at all from the economy, save slave
labor wages.

OK, I agree with you - your elected government should control your wages -
how much should you be paid? How much should you pay for an automobile, a
toaster, cheap wine and lottery tickets?

uh no. the govt has been gutted WRT worker rights. few countries in
the western world are as anti-labor as the US.

companies and their stockholders control wages. stockholders aren't
middle class.

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 18:51:43 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time,
but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

obviously you've never read a book in general, or ayn rand in
particular

Perhaps I should read Buckwheat's books?

is that what your klan buddies call him

Heads Up!
 

On 9-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

OK, I agree with you - your elected government should control your wages
-
how much should you be paid? How much should you pay for an automobile,
a
toaster, cheap wine and lottery tickets?

uh no. the govt has been gutted WRT worker rights. few countries in
the western world are as anti-labor as the US.

companies and their stockholders control wages. stockholders aren't
middle class.

You've been touting "the government" to control wages and "get" you a raise.
Employers control wages, based on supply and demand. If it's not the
company, and not the government, then who? C'mon, it's your premise.

Heads Up!
 

On 9-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Perhaps I should read Buckwheat's books?

is that what your klan buddies call him

??? I'm not a democratic "member" of congress.

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 22:16:19 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 9-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

OK, I agree with you - your elected government should control your wages
-
how much should you be paid? How much should you pay for an automobile,
a
toaster, cheap wine and lottery tickets?

uh no. the govt has been gutted WRT worker rights. few countries in
the western world are as anti-labor as the US.

companies and their stockholders control wages. stockholders aren't
middle class.

You've been touting "the government" to control wages and "get" you a raise.

uh no. i've been touting regulating the market so that CDO's and other
economy destroying instruments aren't possible. i've been touting tax
increases for the rich who've seen their incomes skyrocket. i have
been touting better regulation of union busting policies that
companies use to destroy middle class bargaining

IF the middle class had SOME power we'd be better off

you simply don't understand how the economy works

Employers control wages, based on supply and demand.

no, they dont. they control wages based on how much they want to pay
their CEO and rich stockholders. the proof of this is that's where
all the money went in the last 40 years

your right wing bull**** and mythology doesn't stand up to the
evidence

Heads Up!
 

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 22:17:16 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 9-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Perhaps I should read Buckwheat's books?

is that what your klan buddies call him

??? I'm not a democratic "member" of congress.

there are few democrats in the south. you're not too bright, are you?

Heads Up!
 

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 9-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

It seems strange to me that anyone advocating the destruction of the
economy and the middle class wouldn't have gotten more publicity.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting?



I guess you never heard of the neocons who were running this country for
the
last couple of decades? Their stated plan is to bankrupt the federal
government and make over the country based on their twisted notion of
free

market uber alles.

You were correct - he gets this kind of rant from the idiot box. This is
what happens when you have no useful skills or education.

Seems to me that Wayne is a lot smarter than you, and he has a lot more
skill in his pinky finger than you do in your entire body.