|
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
On 19/02/2011 6:41 PM, L G wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:43:29 -0500, wrote: Are you the only fool that thinks government is doing a good job? and how's wall street doing after sucking 10 trillion out of the economy in the last 3 years? we back at full employment? Wall Street again? Businesses don't suck money from the economy, blind man. They conduct business with strict rules in place. And no government in the land could live by the same rules either. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 19/02/2011 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:23:49 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 4:21 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:01 am, need wrote: In , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 10:44 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The Obamanations are not interested in democracy as shown by what is happening in Wisconsin. When the other side wins the election, they engage in an illegal walkout to prevent legislation. Remember "Card Check" where they tried to deny people the right to vote on unionization? They have no interest in Democracy, they are interested in raw power. Winning the election was not good enough because they do not recognize who won. When that happens, the next step is.................. ...right-wing racist-birthers like you move to another country? Yes, we know you are trying to clear this group for your 2012 propaganda run. Remember how each and every Progressive here answered Tim's call for civility with a defined, NO, NO, NO!? Here is your story. Democrats, being thugs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Oh, did you notice Tim doesn't post here anymore? The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too. I think you should move to Yemen immediately. I'm sure they'd welcome your dislike of gov't. Have more peaceful places to consider. I wouldn't move to a Muslim country for any reason. Don't worry, they won't let you in. Either would Panama or Costa Rica if they find out what you'd be doing/saying about their gov't. Funny, I have already been told I more than qualify and the bank already provided me with the reference I need. Looking at some properties now. And I didn't say anything bad about Panama or Costa Rica... When I go out on a boat fishing, I will not think of you. Do have to bone up on my Spanish though. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 18/02/2011 1:25 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:17:09 -0500, wrote: On 2/18/2011 1:44 PM, jps wrote: I hope a union thug finds Breitbart, removes his balls (or what's left of them) and stuffs them down his throat. Ah, yes. A fine example of inciting violence against conservatives. You lefties sure are an angry bunch. You can't tell the difference between a god-blessed wish and reality. Has it happened in your mind because I wished it? The mark of a conservative. Fantasy=Reality Geez... must work to be conservative from where I stand, as my friends are conservative and retired early. The liberals I know are still working because they have to. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html Social Security reform is about ripping people off that paid far too much into it. Hey, they got your money now they don't want to pay good on the promise. DC is welshing in the people, their own people. Hey, it should be eliminated. But the tax and employers part should be contributed to an account in the employees name, in the employees account and under their control, and not able to withdraw until 60 or so. And withdrawals need to be controlled as not to blow it on drugs and the like. This way government skimming and bamboozling can't diminish its value. Pooling money schemes, be they government SS or defined plans, they are garbage plans designed to hide the skimming and slight. In an ideal world, the idea of government pension is a good one. But the real world, such pooled plans always get the political corruption to rip people off as money like that attracts liberal leaches and political parasites bad. In your name, in your account and in your control. That is where you want your pension and retirement. Keeps it away from the greedy liberal spenders. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 14:53:21 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:37 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html Social Security reform is about ripping people off that paid far too much into it. Hey, they got your money now they don't want to pay good on the promise. DC is welshing in the people, their own people. Hey, it should be eliminated. But the tax and employers part should be contributed to an account in the employees name, in the employees account and under their control, and not able to withdraw until 60 or so. And withdrawals need to be controlled as not to blow it on drugs and the like. This way government skimming and bamboozling can't diminish its value. Pooling money schemes, be they government SS or defined plans, they are garbage plans designed to hide the skimming and slight. In an ideal world, the idea of government pension is a good one. But the real world, such pooled plans always get the political corruption to rip people off as money like that attracts liberal leaches and political parasites bad. In your name, in your account and in your control. That is where you want your pension and retirement. Keeps it away from the greedy liberal spenders. You're brainless. |
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:55:20 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 19/02/2011 9:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:23:49 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 4:21 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:01 am, need wrote: In , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 10:44 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The Obamanations are not interested in democracy as shown by what is happening in Wisconsin. When the other side wins the election, they engage in an illegal walkout to prevent legislation. Remember "Card Check" where they tried to deny people the right to vote on unionization? They have no interest in Democracy, they are interested in raw power. Winning the election was not good enough because they do not recognize who won. When that happens, the next step is.................. ...right-wing racist-birthers like you move to another country? Yes, we know you are trying to clear this group for your 2012 propaganda run. Remember how each and every Progressive here answered Tim's call for civility with a defined, NO, NO, NO!? Here is your story. Democrats, being thugs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Oh, did you notice Tim doesn't post here anymore? The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too. I think you should move to Yemen immediately. I'm sure they'd welcome your dislike of gov't. Have more peaceful places to consider. I wouldn't move to a Muslim country for any reason. Don't worry, they won't let you in. Either would Panama or Costa Rica if they find out what you'd be doing/saying about their gov't. Funny, I have already been told I more than qualify and the bank already provided me with the reference I need. Looking at some properties now. And I didn't say anything bad about Panama or Costa Rica... When I go out on a boat fishing, I will not think of you. Do have to bone up on my Spanish though. Funny... you should leave immediately. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:49:14 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 18/02/2011 10:38 PM, wrote: That is also the fatal flaw in privatizing Social Security. You could certainly see big increases in apparent value but that would fall off pretty fast as soon as you cashed it in. We simply do not have enough money coming into the system to support the boomers. It doesn't matter it is social security or your 401k. You still have 2-3 kids supporting each old person. Most people, a huge majority, probably 80% or more would have been better off if Social Security was deposited into a non-redeemable IRA. A huge part of why Social Security is failing is because of government skimming and bamboozling, not because enough wasn't paid. For example, government borrows Social Security moneys for literally 6% below it's real market value. Collected assets don't even track inflation. By setting interest rates well below real market, they can borrow SS for nothing. Over time this depreciates the value of SS. At this point the fraud on SS has indeed already occured. So moving forward, yep, there isn't enough money coming in. But I read even if the US government didn't spend one sent on payout of SS, yet still had the income, total bankruptcy is still inevitable. That is, the debt problem is so huge that nothing short of a 66% reduction in government spending will have a chance in hell. Either that or taxes must triple. USA may very well be past the tipping point into perpetual structural debt. Hyper-stagflation is inevitable. And with it, no one wants to invest in a stagnant depreciating economy. If you tried to tripple US taxation on business, they would leave the US in flocks. Some already are. Obama has set the stage for USA bankruptcy. I really think the idea is to accumulate all the debt into the US Fed then declare it bankrupt. At which oint USD becoems worthless like toilet paper. Did you know Washington DC creates more new dollars than the US consumes in sheets of toilet paper? You seem to care a great deal about what we do as a nation, yet you have no stake in it. Sounds to me like you're just bored with your life on the couch. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:31:26 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:25 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:44:30 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:29:01 -0800, wrote: We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. ;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. I guess you were absent the day they taught arithmetic. Why don't you find something a little more biting if you're trying to insult me. I apologize, that was snarky. Apology accepted. Are you denying the deficit is a problem and that the entitlements are unsustainable? Never denied it. What I'm denying is that it's a short-term problem. It's a long-term problem. Obama's recent budget addressed it in the long term to the tune of $1.1 T (some things I don't agree with, but that's another story). Of course Sen. Sessions said it didn't go deep enough, but of course he proposed nearly the exact same deficit reduction amount a short while ago. $1.1T is trivial compared to the problem. That barely covers where we are now and there are only a small fraction of the boomers on the public dole. If he can't touch the current deficit, how will he handle the hockey stick that is in the next decade? I don't think the GOP is really talking about it either. They're talking about when it suits them. Sessions was talking about it along with the rest of the right-wing nuts. They would love to gut all the social programs. I'd say that it's in their DNA, except they don't believe in science. That is what brought down the Greek economy We are not Greece... I know that's an incredible statement for some people... No we are not Greece. The world could survive a total collapse of Greece. When the US gets a cold, the world gets pneumonia. We are not even close to a "collapse"... guess you didn't hear but the economy is getting better. You believe Obama bull****? A record number of people are expected to lose their homes THIS YEAR. Civic and state debt defaults are skyrocketing. I believe facts and not racist hyperbole. Bush did this to us. Obama is trying to fix it. Infamous last words. They said that after the Titanic hit the iceberg, we are too big to sink. Feel free to hide under your blankey. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:12:29 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:43 AM, wrote: They said GM was too big to fail. Here is a hint, that was hogwash. US is NOT too big to fail, and in fact is going through that right now. Too big to fail instantly, yes, too big to fail - nope. Sure... throw people out on the street... that's the right-wing solution to the economy! Nope, get off your arse, get a job. USA is still a land of opportunity for the fortunate 4.7% of the worlds population to be born there. Big problem is many of these liberals are too fat, too mentally lazy, mentally screwed up with drugs, think too stupid to really amount to much. But that means you'd have to get a job! Smart money is leaving the US. Look at the stocks, those with foreign content are doing better than pure domestic plays. Even Warrent Buffet knows this. You're not smart. You left. Therefore, the dumb people are leaving. Yep, and that is why USA is short on jobs, no investments in a dying economic model of entitlement and big fat inefficient government. You're not bright enough to understand, yet you keep talking. How is that Obama sized debt work'in for ya? Obama is a debt monger, debt worshiper. And there is no known route to wealth through excessive unmanageable debt. Iceland tried the very policy Obama is trying, it failed miserably. Iceland tried this before too, in 1974 they had 43% inflation. Today, they have high unemployment, stagnant economy and basic minimum wages. Look at Japans lost decades. Look at the racist/birthers... like yourself. Hahaha, still hiding behind race I see. You just can't admit I and others like me are just smarter than you. You're the racist here. You hate Obama. If that's what you call "smarter" you're as dumb as a post. UK devalued the pound by 30% once, took the economy more than a decade to recover. Fact remains, and no liberalism will ever override reality.... you can't debt-spend your way out of a debt problem. In Debt We Trust -- Obama. That spells economic doom. Might take decades, might take days, but be sure the future in debt is not bright. Never invest in a chronic debtor, you lose money that way. Never could a black man do a good job, apparently. When invention, I can assure you your skin color never enters the picture. CAN YOU MAKE ME MONEY or are you just a whiny debt welsher a begging? Same greed, but I am smart enough and worked hard enough I don't have to beg for it. You're the unemployed guy sitting on the couch. No excuses, plenty of "black" people make plenty of money, it isn't about color. It is about mojo and attitude. For you, it's about black people or Hispanics or anyone who doesn't look or think like you. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:13:33 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:43 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:11:28 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 12:11 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:17 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:00:23 -0800, wrote: You think using a majority to supress the people and votes of the opposition is fair play? Oh like the 111th congress? You folks said the republicans should suck it up and go along. When they didn't you said they were obstructionists. Aren't the Wisconsin democrats shutting down the government? Where is your outrage? I wonder what their constitution says about legislators who abandon their jobs? Perhaps the governor can simply replace them. In real life, I imagine all they have to do is walk through and spit in the lobby to demonstrate that they are still working. We are going to be entering uncharted territory though. Nobody really knows what happens when a state files for bankruptcy. How do they discharge their debts when they don't have the money and they can't just print it like the federal government does. Will they try to print some kind of scrip and see if people would take it? Are they just going to tell their debtors to sue them? We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. ;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. Agreed, it will be at least a generation of poverty. Agreed, you're an idiot with no business acumen. Tell that to my accountant. Tell her yourself. Oh wait, you don't need an accountant, since you're on the dole. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 19/02/2011 9:03 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:20:45 -0500, John wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:12:52 -0600, Boating All wrote: In , says... And then there is DEA that serves no function at all except to pioneer new ways to take our rights. expanded unwarranted searches surveillance beyond the worst things NSA does property abuses Swat raids that kill innocents etc ... and doing absolutely nothing to stem the flow of drugs Don't forget prisons to house drug violation offenders. The "war on drugs" is a huge and expensive disgrace. Speaking of prisons.... http://urbanlegends.about.com/librar...rrectional.htm Beautiful, ain't it? More nonsense BS from a crazy person. http://www.snopes.com/photos/architecture/prison.asp Yep, Obama style Club Fed. Just incase Obama gets locked up. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 3:36 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 14:53:21 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:37 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html Social Security reform is about ripping people off that paid far too much into it. Hey, they got your money now they don't want to pay good on the promise. DC is welshing in the people, their own people. Hey, it should be eliminated. But the tax and employers part should be contributed to an account in the employees name, in the employees account and under their control, and not able to withdraw until 60 or so. And withdrawals need to be controlled as not to blow it on drugs and the like. This way government skimming and bamboozling can't diminish its value. Pooling money schemes, be they government SS or defined plans, they are garbage plans designed to hide the skimming and slight. In an ideal world, the idea of government pension is a good one. But the real world, such pooled plans always get the political corruption to rip people off as money like that attracts liberal leaches and political parasites bad. In your name, in your account and in your control. That is where you want your pension and retirement. Keeps it away from the greedy liberal spenders. You're brainless. Your broke. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 3:36 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:41:45 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 7:09 PM, wrote: Did you know 74% of Whitehouse staff got a 9% raise last year? Piggies are having a feast while others suffer. Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Agreed. The cuts have to go deep and *no* sacred cows spared. Even congressional, senate and administration budgets need the big axe. Duplicated agencies collapsed into one with massively reduced budgets. What, is there 5 or 7 housing agencies? Why not one that is color blind? Or why even have a housing agency as states/cities do their own civic planning? The cuts will need to be deep to be effective. But it is also why I am betting they will not do it. Sad to say, US government bankruptcy is inevitable as I don't believe in politicians being this "American" to save the country from eventual currency based bankruptcy. $60 billion is hardly a scratch. Thy need another $1,600 billion. The cuts are not even 5% of what is needed to balance up. A joke really. Now if congress refuses the debt/money expansion say for 3 months and DC government checks bounce to send the message... I will re-assess the politicians desire to remain solvent. Until then people need to start thinking of currency as a rapidly depreciating asset. $1 today is effectively $0.95 next week in purchasing power. Fortunately, you have no say in what happens in this great country. Suits me fine. I realized some time ago I am 1/7,000,000,000 of the higher order predators on this planet, and by luck being born in North American and by getting off my arse, I didn't pretty good. First lesson is you or I are not going to change a damn thing. But how we work with what is presented to us is key for our own successes. So how is that Obama sized debt work'in for ya? -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 3:37 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:55:20 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 9:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:23:49 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 4:21 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:01 am, need wrote: In , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 10:44 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The Obamanations are not interested in democracy as shown by what is happening in Wisconsin. When the other side wins the election, they engage in an illegal walkout to prevent legislation. Remember "Card Check" where they tried to deny people the right to vote on unionization? They have no interest in Democracy, they are interested in raw power. Winning the election was not good enough because they do not recognize who won. When that happens, the next step is.................. ...right-wing racist-birthers like you move to another country? Yes, we know you are trying to clear this group for your 2012 propaganda run. Remember how each and every Progressive here answered Tim's call for civility with a defined, NO, NO, NO!? Here is your story. Democrats, being thugs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Oh, did you notice Tim doesn't post here anymore? The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too. I think you should move to Yemen immediately. I'm sure they'd welcome your dislike of gov't. Have more peaceful places to consider. I wouldn't move to a Muslim country for any reason. Don't worry, they won't let you in. Either would Panama or Costa Rica if they find out what you'd be doing/saying about their gov't. Funny, I have already been told I more than qualify and the bank already provided me with the reference I need. Looking at some properties now. And I didn't say anything bad about Panama or Costa Rica... When I go out on a boat fishing, I will not think of you. Do have to bone up on my Spanish though. Funny... you should leave immediately. Not for a bit yet. Besides, I already check, I can get Internet down there to pester you. If we move I will give you a month or two break. Then rub it in. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 3:38 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:59:59 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:38 AM, wrote: You moved back to Canada because you were thrown out of the US. And I took my job with me! You mean your unemployment. Job /= sitting on couch. No. When I said I needed to return to Canada for personal reasons, they said I should report to the Canadian office. Never even changed bosses. Part of the reasons were the Canadian investments needed some attention I couldn't do in the US, and I could see the US was headed for the wall. loonies traded at 1.013 -- I like. I wouldn't trade a moron for a loonie. Your not even a moron, so you have nothing to trade. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:52:35 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 18/02/2011 7:18 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:43:29 -0500, wrote: Are you the only fool that thinks government is doing a good job? and how's wall street doing after sucking 10 trillion out of the economy in the last 3 years? we back at full employment? You still do not get it do you? Government, big governmetn including Obama are not the solution, they ARE the problem. no, that reagan cliche is dead. especially since reagan RAISED taxes to try and balance the budget if the GOVT was the problem, we wouldnt have had wall street suck 10 TRILLION out of the economy OTHER countries with MORE regulation did NOT suffer as we did you right wingers simply have no EVIDENCE for your views. none. you have MYTH, FAIRY TALES and stories but no EVIDENCE. that's why liberals are smarter; we rely on evidence The more government gets, the less the people get. really? and how we doing in the last 3 years after the MASSIVE DEREGULATION of wall street? we doing OK? US Government is BROKE. Bankrupt. gee. wall street just caused a meltdown of the economy. put millions out of work and you blame it on the GOVT HAHAHAHA Few know, UK tried this once. They devalued their currency by 30% overnight because of DEBT. Took them over a decade to recover. what we NEED to do is REGULATE wall street and re-establish the credibility of markets but the right wont go for it. it's better to let the middle class keep bailing out the rich. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 3:43 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:13:33 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:43 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:11:28 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 12:11 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:17 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:00:23 -0800, wrote: You think using a majority to supress the people and votes of the opposition is fair play? Oh like the 111th congress? You folks said the republicans should suck it up and go along. When they didn't you said they were obstructionists. Aren't the Wisconsin democrats shutting down the government? Where is your outrage? I wonder what their constitution says about legislators who abandon their jobs? Perhaps the governor can simply replace them. In real life, I imagine all they have to do is walk through and spit in the lobby to demonstrate that they are still working. We are going to be entering uncharted territory though. Nobody really knows what happens when a state files for bankruptcy. How do they discharge their debts when they don't have the money and they can't just print it like the federal government does. Will they try to print some kind of scrip and see if people would take it? Are they just going to tell their debtors to sue them? We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. ;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. Agreed, it will be at least a generation of poverty. Agreed, you're an idiot with no business acumen. Tell that to my accountant. Tell her yourself. Oh wait, you don't need an accountant, since you're on the dole. Actually it is a he. Has been doing my taxes since 1994 or so, just got too complex, gain this rate, dividend that rate, this type of dividend is foreign tax credits, currency exchange...50 sheets at least. Something you will never have a problem with. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 20:41:37 -0500, L G wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:43:29 -0500, wrote: Are you the only fool that thinks government is doing a good job? and how's wall street doing after sucking 10 trillion out of the economy in the last 3 years? we back at full employment? Wall Street again? Businesses don't suck money from the economy, blind man. They conduct business with strict rules in place. HAHAHAHAH what rules? you' are SUCH a MORON!! they DEREGULATED WALL STREET WHEN THEY REPEALED GLASS STEAGALL you CLOWN!! there WERE NO REGULATIONS on collateralized debt obligations at ALL. that's why they went from 320 BILLION in 97 to SIXTY TWO TRILLION in 2007 is there ANY reason that happened besides GREED?? even alan greenspan admitted this there is NO evidence that will convince you you're right wing mythology is a fairy tale |
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:53:47 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 18/02/2011 7:17 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too he's RIGHT! let's do what the conservatives say! welfare ONLY for the RICH! starve the middle class! Well, you keep voting for it. Ever wonder where all that Obama spend really goes? I mean REALLY goes? HHAHAHAHA you're the right wing fool! YOU voted for welfare for the rich. not me, sport |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:33:57 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 19/02/2011 9:03 PM, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:20:45 -0500, John wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:12:52 -0600, Boating All wrote: In , says... And then there is DEA that serves no function at all except to pioneer new ways to take our rights. expanded unwarranted searches surveillance beyond the worst things NSA does property abuses Swat raids that kill innocents etc ... and doing absolutely nothing to stem the flow of drugs Don't forget prisons to house drug violation offenders. The "war on drugs" is a huge and expensive disgrace. Speaking of prisons.... http://urbanlegends.about.com/librar...rrectional.htm Beautiful, ain't it? More nonsense BS from a crazy person. http://www.snopes.com/photos/architecture/prison.asp Yep, Obama style Club Fed. Just incase Obama gets locked up. So, you've just proven that you're either 1) illiterate 2) lazy. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:34:58 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:36 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 14:53:21 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:37 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html Social Security reform is about ripping people off that paid far too much into it. Hey, they got your money now they don't want to pay good on the promise. DC is welshing in the people, their own people. Hey, it should be eliminated. But the tax and employers part should be contributed to an account in the employees name, in the employees account and under their control, and not able to withdraw until 60 or so. And withdrawals need to be controlled as not to blow it on drugs and the like. This way government skimming and bamboozling can't diminish its value. Pooling money schemes, be they government SS or defined plans, they are garbage plans designed to hide the skimming and slight. In an ideal world, the idea of government pension is a good one. But the real world, such pooled plans always get the political corruption to rip people off as money like that attracts liberal leaches and political parasites bad. In your name, in your account and in your control. That is where you want your pension and retirement. Keeps it away from the greedy liberal spenders. You're brainless. Your broke. If you believe it, then it must be true. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:52:46 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:37:13 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html That chart in link 2 assumes an unrealistic rise in GDP and the idea that the salaries of the people paying in will rise that fast too. Talk to Bob about how that has been going. The problem is demographic and you don't have a chart to dispute that. No matter what chart or what fact I show you, you're not going to change your mind. So, what's the point? |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 20/02/2011 7:03 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:53:47 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 7:17 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too he's RIGHT! let's do what the conservatives say! welfare ONLY for the RICH! starve the middle class! Well, you keep voting for it. Ever wonder where all that Obama spend really goes? I mean REALLY goes? HHAHAHAHA you're the right wing fool! YOU voted for welfare for the rich. not me, sport I didn't vote for Obama nor Bush. Deciding which banks/businesses get bailed out by who the big depositors and creditors are doesn't work for me, but I profited by following it. Hey, just because I don't agree with it does not mean I didn't or shouldn't profit from it. Emotions and stocks should be like church and state, separate. The best USD based trick though was buying a load of Ford (NYSE:F) for $2.25 and less and selling north of $7. Triple the money and in gains in less than a year. I figured GM would be bailed out and Ford actually benefited because so many suppliers are linked. Hey, liberalism in ponzi debt has been good for me. You can't make this kind of money in a stable well balanced economy and good honest money management by government. No sir, the liberalism churns it up for big swings. -- Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:38:21 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:36 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:41:45 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 7:09 PM, wrote: Did you know 74% of Whitehouse staff got a 9% raise last year? Piggies are having a feast while others suffer. Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Agreed. The cuts have to go deep and *no* sacred cows spared. Even congressional, senate and administration budgets need the big axe. Duplicated agencies collapsed into one with massively reduced budgets. What, is there 5 or 7 housing agencies? Why not one that is color blind? Or why even have a housing agency as states/cities do their own civic planning? The cuts will need to be deep to be effective. But it is also why I am betting they will not do it. Sad to say, US government bankruptcy is inevitable as I don't believe in politicians being this "American" to save the country from eventual currency based bankruptcy. $60 billion is hardly a scratch. Thy need another $1,600 billion. The cuts are not even 5% of what is needed to balance up. A joke really. Now if congress refuses the debt/money expansion say for 3 months and DC government checks bounce to send the message... I will re-assess the politicians desire to remain solvent. Until then people need to start thinking of currency as a rapidly depreciating asset. $1 today is effectively $0.95 next week in purchasing power. Fortunately, you have no say in what happens in this great country. Suits me fine. I realized some time ago I am 1/7,000,000,000 of the higher order predators on this planet, and by luck being born in North American and by getting off my arse, I didn't pretty good. First lesson is you or I are not going to change a damn thing. But how we work with what is presented to us is key for our own successes. So how is that Obama sized debt work'in for ya? Suits me even more. You're about as much a predator as is a hummingbird. You're a loser and useless human being who sits on his butt and complains. You are __certainly__ not going to change anything. I agree with that! |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:39:33 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:37 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:55:20 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 9:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:23:49 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 4:21 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:01 am, need wrote: In , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 10:44 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The Obamanations are not interested in democracy as shown by what is happening in Wisconsin. When the other side wins the election, they engage in an illegal walkout to prevent legislation. Remember "Card Check" where they tried to deny people the right to vote on unionization? They have no interest in Democracy, they are interested in raw power. Winning the election was not good enough because they do not recognize who won. When that happens, the next step is.................. ...right-wing racist-birthers like you move to another country? Yes, we know you are trying to clear this group for your 2012 propaganda run. Remember how each and every Progressive here answered Tim's call for civility with a defined, NO, NO, NO!? Here is your story. Democrats, being thugs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Oh, did you notice Tim doesn't post here anymore? The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too. I think you should move to Yemen immediately. I'm sure they'd welcome your dislike of gov't. Have more peaceful places to consider. I wouldn't move to a Muslim country for any reason. Don't worry, they won't let you in. Either would Panama or Costa Rica if they find out what you'd be doing/saying about their gov't. Funny, I have already been told I more than qualify and the bank already provided me with the reference I need. Looking at some properties now. And I didn't say anything bad about Panama or Costa Rica... When I go out on a boat fishing, I will not think of you. Do have to bone up on my Spanish though. Funny... you should leave immediately. Not for a bit yet. Besides, I already check, I can get Internet down there to pester you. If we move I will give you a month or two break. Then rub it in. Sure. Right. You don't have the basic instinct to do more than sit and complain. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:42:58 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:38 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:59:59 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:38 AM, wrote: You moved back to Canada because you were thrown out of the US. And I took my job with me! You mean your unemployment. Job /= sitting on couch. No. When I said I needed to return to Canada for personal reasons, they said I should report to the Canadian office. Never even changed bosses. Part of the reasons were the Canadian investments needed some attention I couldn't do in the US, and I could see the US was headed for the wall. Right. Sure. You were booted out and you can't get back in. loonies traded at 1.013 -- I like. I wouldn't trade a moron for a loonie. Your not even a moron, so you have nothing to trade. I'm not a moron and you're right, I wouldn't trade anything I have for anything you have. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:54:39 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:41:26 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:49:27 -0500, wrote: Oops... Ford abolished the AEC. Nice try. FYI, Carter was a nuclear engineer. DoE was a Carter invention. Nobody said ERDA was a good idea either but it was not the same huge bureaucracy DoE became. I was in DC at the time, working in those buildings. I saw what happened. Each time they changed the name, another office was started up and the existing office just got a new sign. The joke at GSA was they were going to hang the signs with thumb screws. Sure... DoE... created by a Dem, therefore it's horrible. What total nonsense. You just want to eliminate anything that doesn't directly involved profit. No it was bad because it was an extra layer of bureaucracy on top of an already redundant layer on an agency that was working well. According to you. So, no coordination among the disparate groups is needed?? That's what you're claiming... |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:57:11 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:41:26 -0800, wrote: It might help a little but the rich don't really have that much money. I already showed you the total net worth of the Forbes 400 would only handle our current deficit for about 18 months. Bear in mind that is their unrealized profit on securities that the can't really write a check for. Get a calculator, go to Forbes and add it up yourself if you are bored. Go get a calculator and figure out how much of an increase of 4% for those making over $250K will have on deficit reduction. What do you think the median income of that group is? $500,000? $1M? Lets take the best case scenario and say $1M They would pay an extra $40,000 times 1.9 million households ... $80 billion, not a small number but still chump change compared to the $1.1 trillion deficit. Go "figure" your math some more. You're not even close. Facts please? You can't just say no it isn't without some facts. Which part is wrong? I've done that several times. Most recently that the top 400 have more than the bottom 50%. Yet, the Republicans want to tax the bottom half and GOD FORBID touch any money from the top. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:59:43 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:43 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:13:33 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 11:43 AM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:11:28 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 12:11 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:17 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:00:23 -0800, wrote: You think using a majority to supress the people and votes of the opposition is fair play? Oh like the 111th congress? You folks said the republicans should suck it up and go along. When they didn't you said they were obstructionists. Aren't the Wisconsin democrats shutting down the government? Where is your outrage? I wonder what their constitution says about legislators who abandon their jobs? Perhaps the governor can simply replace them. In real life, I imagine all they have to do is walk through and spit in the lobby to demonstrate that they are still working. We are going to be entering uncharted territory though. Nobody really knows what happens when a state files for bankruptcy. How do they discharge their debts when they don't have the money and they can't just print it like the federal government does. Will they try to print some kind of scrip and see if people would take it? Are they just going to tell their debtors to sue them? We better get used to questions like this because the whole country has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the populace is better armed. ;-) There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid fantasy. Agreed, it will be at least a generation of poverty. Agreed, you're an idiot with no business acumen. Tell that to my accountant. Tell her yourself. Oh wait, you don't need an accountant, since you're on the dole. Actually it is a he. Has been doing my taxes since 1994 or so, just got too complex, gain this rate, dividend that rate, this type of dividend is foreign tax credits, currency exchange...50 sheets at least. Something you will never have a problem with. Too complex? That's funny. He is, I'm sure, a figgy of your imagination. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 2/20/2011 8:57 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:41:26 -0800, wrote: It might help a little but the rich don't really have that much money. I already showed you the total net worth of the Forbes 400 would only handle our current deficit for about 18 months. Bear in mind that is their unrealized profit on securities that the can't really write a check for. Get a calculator, go to Forbes and add it up yourself if you are bored. Go get a calculator and figure out how much of an increase of 4% for those making over $250K will have on deficit reduction. What do you think the median income of that group is? $500,000? $1M? Lets take the best case scenario and say $1M They would pay an extra $40,000 times 1.9 million households ... $80 billion, not a small number but still chump change compared to the $1.1 trillion deficit. Go "figure" your math some more. You're not even close. Facts please? You can't just say no it isn't without some facts. Which part is wrong? Jessica de plume does as she pleases. She will also keep arguing after she loses. Don't ever expect her to acknowledge she's been defeated. You're beginning to sound like the guy that expects "different results". Move on. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 2/20/2011 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:38:21 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:36 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:41:45 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 7:09 PM, wrote: Did you know 74% of Whitehouse staff got a 9% raise last year? Piggies are having a feast while others suffer. Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Agreed. The cuts have to go deep and *no* sacred cows spared. Even congressional, senate and administration budgets need the big axe. Duplicated agencies collapsed into one with massively reduced budgets. What, is there 5 or 7 housing agencies? Why not one that is color blind? Or why even have a housing agency as states/cities do their own civic planning? The cuts will need to be deep to be effective. But it is also why I am betting they will not do it. Sad to say, US government bankruptcy is inevitable as I don't believe in politicians being this "American" to save the country from eventual currency based bankruptcy. $60 billion is hardly a scratch. Thy need another $1,600 billion. The cuts are not even 5% of what is needed to balance up. A joke really. Now if congress refuses the debt/money expansion say for 3 months and DC government checks bounce to send the message... I will re-assess the politicians desire to remain solvent. Until then people need to start thinking of currency as a rapidly depreciating asset. $1 today is effectively $0.95 next week in purchasing power. Fortunately, you have no say in what happens in this great country. Suits me fine. I realized some time ago I am 1/7,000,000,000 of the higher order predators on this planet, and by luck being born in North American and by getting off my arse, I didn't pretty good. First lesson is you or I are not going to change a damn thing. But how we work with what is presented to us is key for our own successes. So how is that Obama sized debt work'in for ya? Suits me even more. You're about as much a predator as is a hummingbird. You're a loser and useless human being who sits on his butt and complains. You are __certainly__ not going to change anything. I agree with that! Dumb, Jessie. Really dumb. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 2/20/2011 9:38 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:39:33 -0700, wrote: On 20/02/2011 3:37 PM, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:55:20 -0700, wrote: On 19/02/2011 9:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:23:49 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 4:21 PM, wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:20:04 -0700, wrote: On 18/02/2011 9:15 AM, Frogwatch wrote: On Feb 18, 11:01 am, need wrote: In , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/18/11 10:44 AM, Frogwatch wrote: The Obamanations are not interested in democracy as shown by what is happening in Wisconsin. When the other side wins the election, they engage in an illegal walkout to prevent legislation. Remember "Card Check" where they tried to deny people the right to vote on unionization? They have no interest in Democracy, they are interested in raw power. Winning the election was not good enough because they do not recognize who won. When that happens, the next step is.................. ...right-wing racist-birthers like you move to another country? Yes, we know you are trying to clear this group for your 2012 propaganda run. Remember how each and every Progressive here answered Tim's call for civility with a defined, NO, NO, NO!? Here is your story. Democrats, being thugs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE Here is another advocate of "free speech" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd? http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash- left-behind/ Oh, did you notice Tim doesn't post here anymore? The lefties do not recognize elections and routinely attack any dissent and then blame everyone else. Their own shot Gifford and they blamed Palin. Lefties eventually always resort to mass murder as Obama's best friend Bill Ayers said he wanted when he said he wanted to kill 20 million Americans. The liberal lefties up here are the same. Irrational zealots of telling others they will pay for their welfare. Nosy types too. I think you should move to Yemen immediately. I'm sure they'd welcome your dislike of gov't. Have more peaceful places to consider. I wouldn't move to a Muslim country for any reason. Don't worry, they won't let you in. Either would Panama or Costa Rica if they find out what you'd be doing/saying about their gov't. Funny, I have already been told I more than qualify and the bank already provided me with the reference I need. Looking at some properties now. And I didn't say anything bad about Panama or Costa Rica... When I go out on a boat fishing, I will not think of you. Do have to bone up on my Spanish though. Funny... you should leave immediately. Not for a bit yet. Besides, I already check, I can get Internet down there to pester you. If we move I will give you a month or two break. Then rub it in. Sure. Right. You don't have the basic instinct to do more than sit and complain. Heh? |
Winning elections is not good enough
On 2/20/2011 9:41 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:57:11 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:41:26 -0800, wrote: It might help a little but the rich don't really have that much money. I already showed you the total net worth of the Forbes 400 would only handle our current deficit for about 18 months. Bear in mind that is their unrealized profit on securities that the can't really write a check for. Get a calculator, go to Forbes and add it up yourself if you are bored. Go get a calculator and figure out how much of an increase of 4% for those making over $250K will have on deficit reduction. What do you think the median income of that group is? $500,000? $1M? Lets take the best case scenario and say $1M They would pay an extra $40,000 times 1.9 million households ... $80 billion, not a small number but still chump change compared to the $1.1 trillion deficit. Go "figure" your math some more. You're not even close. Facts please? You can't just say no it isn't without some facts. Which part is wrong? I've done that several times. Most recently that the top 400 have more than the bottom 50%. Yet, the Republicans want to tax the bottom half and GOD FORBID touch any money from the top. You're just plain crazy. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:08:05 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:36:16 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:52:46 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:37:13 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:28:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:01:11 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:17:10 -0500, wrote: Cutting half of the DoD budget is a good start but if you ignore SS/Medicare you will never get a handle on the deficit. The rest may be good symbolism but they are insignificant. Completely untrue and misleading as usual. What is untrue? You don't think SS and Medicare are a budget buster in the out years? SS/MC are not in trouble right now. They will be if nothing is changed, but NOT RIGHT NOW. WTF? Both are paying out more than they take in. In any other business that is called running at a loss. There is no likely scenario that will make that get any better. One of the current proposals is to remove the FICA tax altogether so they do not have to perpetuate this lie of "insurance" or "an investment". SS/Medicare will just become welfare. That will make it easier to ration, means test and alter benefits. So what. That's a long-term problem not a short term one. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...rming_soc.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...shortfall.html That chart in link 2 assumes an unrealistic rise in GDP and the idea that the salaries of the people paying in will rise that fast too. Talk to Bob about how that has been going. The problem is demographic and you don't have a chart to dispute that. No matter what chart or what fact I show you, you're not going to change your mind. So, what's the point? You are the one who keeps changing the subject when you get backed into a corner. I say SS and Medicare is upside down. You present a chart that says SS and Medicare are not only upside down but will be in the red forever and try to say that is fine. I haven't changed the subject at all. I've said and will continue to say that this is a long-term problem not a short one. Holding people hostage of this (what's happening in the House as an example) is worse than nonsense. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:17:11 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 18:40:46 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:54:39 -0500, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:41:26 -0800, wrote: On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:49:27 -0500, wrote: Oops... Ford abolished the AEC. Nice try. FYI, Carter was a nuclear engineer. DoE was a Carter invention. Nobody said ERDA was a good idea either but it was not the same huge bureaucracy DoE became. I was in DC at the time, working in those buildings. I saw what happened. Each time they changed the name, another office was started up and the existing office just got a new sign. The joke at GSA was they were going to hang the signs with thumb screws. Sure... DoE... created by a Dem, therefore it's horrible. What total nonsense. You just want to eliminate anything that doesn't directly involved profit. No it was bad because it was an extra layer of bureaucracy on top of an already redundant layer on an agency that was working well. According to you. So, no coordination among the disparate groups is needed?? That's what you're claiming... Make up your mind, you started out saying we needed this omnibus bureaucracy to regulate a small sector of the energy business that runs nuclear reactors and now you are talking about disparate groups? What groups? There were two agencies that were disbanded. They, along with several others were combined. For some reason you think that represents terrible bloat. Why should the agency that regulates the safety of our nukes have to live under the same bloated bureaucracy that is promoting the collection of methane from cow farts? So, therefore, remove it. No way to fix something right? That's your argument? They have nothing to do with each other. IMHO putting AEC in ERDA was a dumb idea. (a feeling shared by the AEC people I knew at the time) Rolling that up in another larger agency was a dumb idea squared. You can't even say they were "developing" atomic energy (the D in ERDA). We haven't built a nuke plant since they created these boondoggles. Ever hear of the power grid in the US? It's got to be under some agency. Perhaps you'd prefer it to be under the DoJ or the military? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com