Page 9 of 25 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314151619 ... LastLast
Results 105 to 117 of 325
  1. #105
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Helena, Montana
    Posts
    2,155
    Glad you agree! I'm sure he will appreciate your vote.
    Don't worry zombies are looking for brains, you're safe...

  2. #106
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    5,490
    Quote Originally Posted by kls-ccc View Post
    So you're talking about like when Obama/Biden keep telling us that they are for the middle class, then Biden comes out and says teh middle class has been getting hammered for the last 4 years.

    Or is that something different cause it's a Dem doin it to us?
    You missed it. Of course it's different. Our middle class has been shrinking for years but more so since Reagan. It's not this administration's obective to hobble the middle class. That's the result of modern conservatism. Many conservatives might not have that goal directly but their combined efforts get that result.
    I'll never know why voters won't vote their self intersts. Just ask the question: How does this party serve my present/future needs.
    I woldn't pitch any idea that would hold up the Dems as evolving into anything more than a political party making their own share of $crewups. It's just when you cook everything down, most working stiffs benefit more from the Democrates.
    Tracers work both ways.

  3. #107
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    5,490
    Quote Originally Posted by newoldtech View Post
    Not to pick on PBS but there are literally hundreds and hundreds of TV stations. If PBS cant make it on their own, well to me thats their problem. Why the hell are we subsidising a TV staton has been beyond me for years. And if its is deemed that they have some shows that are worth saving then there are plenty of other stations than can carrry them.

    Bottom line there are many tough decisions that will need to be made if we ever hope to be solvent. We need someone in office with the nads to make them.
    Most of PBS's budget comes from subscribers. Part of reasoning for gov participating in funding (BTW, it's not much) was so the programming wouldn't be compromised by advertisers. This is the deep hole the networks fell into. Now the networks are fully compromised mostly by drug advertisers. How can a station come out with a story that faults the corporates paying their salary?
    If you were in deep debt and could remedy it by giving yourself a raise wouldn't you do it? Income (taxes) gets rid of debt. Jobs cure income loss. To just cut spending is the modern political pacifier and to point to PBS is as a problem is nothing but a diversion.
    Other stations won't carry many of PBS's shows because the numbers aren't there to make the money their advertisers demand. It's still the best on TV.
    Tracers work both ways.

  4. #108
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    5,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Gib's Son View Post
    I think you know why, indoctrination.
    You're kidding, right? If not you obviously don't watch PBS. Do you like conservative TV? Try McLaughlin Group, MI5, Washington Week, just a few.
    Tracers work both ways.

  5. #109
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,265
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    The responses make it clear why Rmoney needs to SPECIFY how he is going to pull off this economic miracle - ideology plays a part in what a candidate will cut so if you make the claim you need to give the details so that voters will have a clear choice concerning programs that might get axed. With his record of etch a sketch policy it probably wouldn't mean much anyway so we might as well forget it and crown him king and let him have at it.


    No need to worry about what Sh!tty .....er .....Mitty is going to do about anything.

    This election is over.

    The Conservlicans on here are just grasping at straws.

    The way they talk you would think Mitty is winning. Regardless of the fact that in most of the swing states he is behind.

    They also know its over but can't stand the thought of losing.

    So...... they just keep Hoping and Praying. 24/7.

    Sadly for them its not going to change the outcome.

  6. #110
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Gib's Son View Post
    Big Bird, Little Bird, Fat Bird, Skinny Bird, Flip the Bird. Who the heck cares? Everyone should pay income tax, period! After all, is not that "Fair" and "Patriotic"?
    Hope you don't mind me throwing in some local colour into the conversation, your post begs it. We just had a minimum wage increase in our province, first one in years, by the lefter leaning party. The right leaning one said it only hurts business and if the government was concerned with the plight of those in the lower wage bracket they would instead increase the exemption before someone pays income tax. The intelligent person would look at both positions and say they are two sides of the same coin, the money has to come from somewhere. Either the person gets more from their employer or if it comes from paying reduced taxes, from government which really mean that other working people are making up the difference.

    Either way the person getting the wage increase or the tax reduction gets the break paid for by the employer or the public. Now why do we feel the person should get more money in their pocket? Either we feel the employer is not paying them enough to get by or..., actually I can't think of another or. Now how can we ask a person to pay tax if we do not think they are getting paid enough from their employer? We could ask the employer to pay them more to cover the tax we want them to pay, that way they will care about the tax rate. But this would make it more expensive for the business to operate.

    If you really think about it, the employers that pay so little that we feel the employee needs a break on their taxes really means the employer is getting subsidized by the rest of us. Easy to get everyone to pay taxes, but can they get by if we make them?
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

  7. #111
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    The responses make it clear why Rmoney
    needs to SPECIFY how he is going to pull off this economic miracle - ideology plays a part in what a candidate will cut so if you make the claim you need to give the details so that voters will have a clear choice concerning programs that might get axed. With his record of etch a sketch policy it probably wouldn't mean much anyway so we might as well forget it and crown him king and let him have at it.
    Ever hear of an American Economic Proffessor Richard Wolf Net ?

    An Emeritus Proffesor no doubt. I took the liberty of taping his 2 hour tirade attack on Capitalism and successfully gave my wife a play by play synopsis on the content 30 minutes before I hit the play button.

    I had to explain to her that even educated Liberals will only dig deep enough to satisfy their own agenda.

    He of course blamed the banks for the 2008 collapse and gave credit to Roosevelt and the New Deal for our recovery.

    This guy is an Emeritus Economics Proffesor.

  8. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Lancaster, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    884
    It's professor.
    KX500......the original big green meanie

  9. #113
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    You missed it. Of course it's different. Our middle class has been shrinking for years but more so since Reagan. It's not this administration's obective to hobble the middle class. That's the result of modern conservatism. Many conservatives might not have that goal directly but their combined efforts get that result.
    I'll never know why voters won't vote their self intersts. Just ask the question: How does this party serve my present/future needs.
    I woldn't pitch any idea that would hold up the Dems as evolving into anything more than a political party making their own share of $crewups. It's just when you cook everything down, most working stiffs benefit more from the Democrates.
    So you don't think it's Obama's plan to rape the middle class and give the spoils to the elite? $700,000,000,000 to wall street bankers with no strings, that helped out {I assume your middle class like me} us out how? Setting up a welfare system that once you get on it you rarely get off. Obama's said he believes in the redistribution of wealth. Everywhere it's been tried, every model ever built shows that if you put all the money in the pot and gave every one the same amount in 5 yrs or less those that had the money would have eevrything they put in and more, those that were middleclass or lower had less money.

    As I see it the Liberals {won't specify Dem or Rep cause there are some on both sides} look at the phrase "All men are created equal" and put the emphesis on Equal. By doing that they want to keep everyone equal even if they don't want ot work for it. Conservatives put the emphesis on Created. In doing so it is realized we all start in the same place but where we end up is our choice. How much effort, blood, sweat and tears we want to put in will benifit us in the long run. If we don't want to put in the effort then be happy with what you get.

    Back to the $700 billion. Where do you suppose our economy would be if that money was given equally to the middle class? A lot of that money would have been spent on frivolase stuff, but it would have been back in the economy. A good share would have went to pay down loans, buy new cars, home upgrades, but again back into the economy. Some of it would have went into savings account and investments. Where it went was into bank accounts that were already overflowing. It was only AFTER people started raising holy hell about the bankers getting huge bonuses that Obama said anything. If it wern't for that nothing would have been said, don't kid yourself. Look at where that money went then look at Obama's contributors. Suprise, same list.

    To me the only reason that anyone wants to take money from your pocket to give it to me is so they can keep some for themselves, and it's what they always do. As far as either party giving me anything, Bush's stimulas it the last and biggest thing I remember ever getting. I have always made $2 more than what I ahould to qualify for Pell grants, student loans, etc. When my 1st kid went to collage we filled out all the FAFSA forms, they qualified for $125 in non garauntied student loans with payments starting right away, BFD. So when kid 2 went we didn't even bother with FAFSA. At collage they wanted to get a part time job with the collage, to qualify they had to fill our the FAFSA. Guess what, no job we made to much, BS.

    Today anyone that thinks any politial party or person is going to do something to help them has their head so far up their --- they need to unbutton their shirt to use their navel as a perascope. So to me, the less government, the fewer taxes, the better for all.

  10. #114
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Actually the bailout money went to get the banks solvent enough so that the free flow of money continued in the economy. It blows but without the banks we would have a hard time buying and selling. And it was thought of as necessary even before Obama was elected and throughout the world and not just in the USA.
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

  11. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,017
    Quote Originally Posted by kls-ccc View Post
    So you don't think it's Obama's plan to rape the middle class and give the spoils to the elite? $700,000,000,000 to wall street bankers with no strings, that helped out {I assume your middle class like me} us out how? Setting up a welfare system that once you get on it you rarely get off. Obama's said he believes in the redistribution of wealth. Everywhere it's been tried, every model ever built shows that if you put all the money in the pot and gave every one the same amount in 5 yrs or less those that had the money would have eevrything they put in and more, those that were middleclass or lower had less money.

    As I see it the Liberals {won't specify Dem or Rep cause there are some on both sides} look at the phrase "All men are created equal" and put the emphesis on Equal. By doing that they want to keep everyone equal even if they don't want ot work for it. Conservatives put the emphesis on Created. In doing so it is realized we all start in the same place but where we end up is our choice. How much effort, blood, sweat and tears we want to put in will benifit us in the long run. If we don't want to put in the effort then be happy with what you get.

    Back to the $700 billion. Where do you suppose our economy would be if that money was given equally to the middle class? A lot of that money would have been spent on frivolase stuff, but it would have been back in the economy. A good share would have went to pay down loans, buy new cars, home upgrades, but again back into the economy. Some of it would have went into savings account and investments. Where it went was into bank accounts that were already overflowing. It was only AFTER people started raising holy hell about the bankers getting huge bonuses that Obama said anything. If it wern't for that nothing would have been said, don't kid yourself. Look at where that money went then look at Obama's contributors. Suprise, same list.

    To me the only reason that anyone wants to take money from your pocket to give it to me is so they can keep some for themselves, and it's what they always do. As far as either party giving me anything, Bush's stimulas it the last and biggest thing I remember ever getting. I have always made $2 more than what I ahould to qualify for Pell grants, student loans, etc. When my 1st kid went to collage we filled out all the FAFSA forms, they qualified for $125 in non garauntied student loans with payments starting right away, BFD. So when kid 2 went we didn't even bother with FAFSA. At collage they wanted to get a part time job with the collage, to qualify they had to fill our the FAFSA. Guess what, no job we made to much, BS.

    Today anyone that thinks any politial party or person is going to do something to help them has their head so far up their --- they need to unbutton their shirt to use their navel as a perascope. So to me, the less government, the fewer taxes, the better for all.
    Great post kls. The middle class is generally always going to be better off if the feds just butt-out of their lives. The poor may vote for freebies, but in the long run they are also worse off being trapped in a cycle of dependency. Small government is the best government. Empowering the feds will always lead to the rich interests getting some corrupt benefit, as they have the brains-money-influence to corrupt.
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

  12. #116
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    2,038
    The money would have went into the bank anyway, just less direct, and wouldn't have ended up as exec bonuses. Excess money goes into the banks, shortfalls come out. You don't think most people with a house underwater would have used that money to pay down their loan? Really if you think about it even if everyone went out and got a tatoo with it, eventually the parlor would have to put the money into the bank. The only way I can think of the bank wouldn't have seen most of that money is illegal activity, ie drugs, etc. But more importantly it would have helped almost everyone, individuals, retail, manufacturing, services, and the banks.

  13. #117
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by kls-ccc View Post
    The money would have went into the bank anyway, just less direct, and wouldn't have ended up as exec bonuses. Excess money goes into the banks, shortfalls come out. You don't think most people with a house underwater would have used that money to pay down their loan? Really if you think about it even if everyone went out and got a tatoo with it, eventually the parlor would have to put the money into the bank. The only way I can think of the bank wouldn't have seen most of that money is illegal activity, ie drugs, etc. But more importantly it would have helped almost everyone, individuals, retail, manufacturing, services, and the banks.
    How are you going to get the money to them? Mail it?
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

Page 9 of 25 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314151619 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event