PDA

View Full Version : This could explain a lot


radarwhiz
03-13-2011, 11:19 AM
If the opposite of pro is con, then what must be the opposite of progress?

Blacky
03-13-2011, 11:21 AM
Ar, Ar, very funny!:lol:

Manarius
03-13-2011, 12:53 PM
If the opposite of pro is con, then what must be the opposite of progress?A Republican controlled congress, just in case you forgot. :mad:

Mike621
03-14-2011, 08:40 AM
A Republican controlled congress, just in case you forgot. :mad:

Wheres the like button when I need it?

svxcess
03-14-2011, 09:17 AM
.



http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQddpRAGUQcOQT9YyEC6IiZ_fmDvotXS VhGt09xm2x-y99F0hyDQA


Just by touching the button, the capacitive reaction by your monitor, coupled with the hexa-coupling of the inductive resonance
produced by the website's multi-complicator, allows a vote to be quietly counted and recorded.

(At least this is how it was explained to me by my state senator)



.

lhopp77
03-15-2011, 09:52 AM
A Republican controlled congress, just in case you forgot. :mad:

Thank goodness! Maybe they can steer us away from financial disaster that we were headed for under total democrat control. ;) :D

Lee

radarwhiz
03-15-2011, 10:17 AM
Thank goodness! Maybe they can steer us away from financial disaster that we were headed for under total democrat control. ;) :D

Lee

"Away from the financial disaster that we're already in"

Glad someone agrees with me:)

sunvalleyray
03-15-2011, 10:46 AM
"Away from the financial disaster that we're already in"

Glad someone agrees with me:)

Trying to blame one party is futile, they are both guilty of lowering taxes, starting unfunded wars and rewarding and protecting special interests like Wall Street. This country needs election reform i.e. public supported elections and limitations on special interests.

Americans need to stop exporting jobs and start creating good middle class jobs. For the last thirty years the disparity between the wealthiest and poorest in our country has been growing unlike anywhere else in the world. Without a healthy middle class, our country is doomed.

The bottom line is that we all cannot expect someone else to pay via taxes for wars, road, schools etc. but we need a level playing field and a fair distribution of wealth. My goal is to pay $1,000,000 plus a year in taxes for this will mean that I will have to try to get by with only another $2,000,000 income. I think we should all want to pay our (fair) share of taxes for few countries allow such opportunities and upper mobility as ours, or at least as our country used to.

Ray

RojoRocket
03-15-2011, 10:57 AM
Funny how most of the moves to "steer us away from financial disaster" have awarded tax breaks to the rich and corporations while cutting needed services and budgets for departments like the EPA , responsible for protecting your water and air quality. Somehow I doubt that you folks are among the beneficiaries of this largesse. Maybe you could consider listening to something other than FOX News and "hate radio". If you believe that the travesties against collective bargaining in the public sector (including the teachers of your children) and emergency powers granted to their corporate controlled governors that are happening in Wisconsin and Michigan can't effect you it's time you wake up. :(

Glenn

radarwhiz
03-15-2011, 11:30 AM
]The bottom line is that we all cannot expect someone else to pay via taxes for wars, road, schools etc. but we need a level playing field and a fair distribution of wealth.
I think we should all want to pay our (fair) share of taxes for few countries allow such opportunities and upper mobility as ours, or at least as our country used to.

Ray

Absolutely right, Ray. It's not paying taxes that I got a problem with, it's what those taxes are being used for. When they're paying the welfare checks of people who are too lazy to get off their asses and get jobs, when they're paying for housing, grocieries, and healthcare of people who couldn't keep it in their pants and got ten bastard kids running around, then I got a problem. Meanwhile I'm replacing balljoints and shocks twice a year because they can't fix the pot holes littering the roads.:mad:

sunvalleyray
03-15-2011, 06:02 PM
Absolutely right, Ray. It's not paying taxes that I got a problem with, it's what those taxes are being used for. When they're paying the welfare checks of people who are too lazy to get off their asses and get jobs, when they're paying for housing, grocieries, and healthcare of people who couldn't keep it in their pants and got ten bastard kids running around, then I got a problem. Meanwhile I'm replacing balljoints and shocks twice a year because they can't fix the pot holes littering the roads.:mad:

Difficult not to agree with your point, many of us have issues with how our taxes are spent but it really does come back to whom we put in office and how they decide to spend our money. Regarding welfare...I agree we should not be promoting people not to work or have children they don't want or are not able to care for but once again those people are just using the system set up by our politicians. I do believe that we need to care for the less fortunate but not promote freeloading of any kind. I will bet that corporate welfare - can you say bail out - far exceed all welfare payments annually; and at least the welfare people spend there money in the US unlike so many of the rich who own homes, yachts and cars made overseas.

Ray

Ray

Cam
03-15-2011, 06:39 PM
they are both guilty of lowering taxes

What is wrong with that? It is not how much money you have, but how you spend it. We pay far too much in taxes. I don't personally get any gain from at least 50 percent of the taxes I pay.

sunvalleyray
03-15-2011, 07:11 PM
What is wrong with that? It is not how much money you have, but how you spend it. We pay far too much in taxes. I don't personally get any gain from at least 50 percent of the taxes I pay.

Can you say deficit!!! The United States has one of the lowest tax rates in the industrialize world, meanwhile our infrastructure is crumbling. I think it is difficult to personalize what one receives directly from taxes but from my travels around the world, I think we take for granted many of the freedoms and opportunities our system provides us. I do agree with your point on how we spend our tax revenues...I sure wish other countries that rely on our military made a contribution to that expense. If we are going to be the policeman of the world, we should at least get paid for it.

Ray

radarwhiz
03-15-2011, 07:13 PM
it really does come back to whom we put in office and how they decide to spend our money.

And we decide who to put in office by what they promise they'll do. It requires more responsibility of the voters to thoroughly evaluate the candidates and not be emotionally swayed by one hell of a teleprompter reader. The last presidential election was a very emotional, irresponsible one.

sunvalleyray
03-15-2011, 08:25 PM
And we decide who to put in office by what they promise they'll do. It requires more responsibility of the voters to thoroughly evaluate the candidates and not be emotionally swayed by one hell of a teleprompter reader. The last presidential election was a very emotional, irresponsible one.

Personally I think we are sold a bill of goods by both parties and the powers that be get what they want. I totally agree about an informed electorate but in Utah, the most conservative state in the union, has one of the lowest voter turn outs in the country. They don't even bother to become informed whereas in other countries people stand in line for hours just to cast their vote. Presently we have people rebelling against oppressive regimes in the Middle East, fighting and dying for the rights we take for granted. Once again, many of us take for granted many of our rights. Guess I am getting old and cynical but I sure wish we all could have more civil discourse and agree on how to solve our countries' problems.

Ray

NikFu S.
03-15-2011, 08:58 PM
Trying to blame one party is futile, they are both guilty of lowering taxes, starting unfunded wars and rewarding and protecting special interests like Wall Street. This country needs election reform i.e. public supported elections and limitations on special interests.

Americans need to stop exporting jobs and start creating good middle class jobs. For the last thirty years the disparity between the wealthiest and poorest in our country has been growing unlike anywhere else in the world. Without a healthy middle class, our country is doomed.

The bottom line is that we all cannot expect someone else to pay via taxes for wars, road, schools etc. but we need a level playing field and a fair distribution of wealth. My goal is to pay $1,000,000 plus a year in taxes for this will mean that I will have to try to get by with only another $2,000,000 income. I think we should all want to pay our (fair) share of taxes for few countries allow such opportunities and upper mobility as ours, or at least as our country used to.

Ray

*Like*

Funny how most of the moves to "steer us away from financial disaster" have awarded tax breaks to the rich and corporations while cutting needed services and budgets for departments like the EPA , responsible for protecting your water and air quality. Somehow I doubt that you folks are among the beneficiaries of this largesse. Maybe you could consider listening to something other than FOX News and "hate radio". If you believe that the travesties against collective bargaining in the public sector (including the teachers of your children) and emergency powers granted to their corporate controlled governors that are happening in Wisconsin and Michigan can't effect you it's time you wake up. :(

Glenn

*Like*

Absolutely right, Ray. It's not paying taxes that I got a problem with, it's what those taxes are being used for. When they're paying the welfare checks of people who are too lazy to get off their asses and get jobs, when they're paying for housing, grocieries, and healthcare of people who couldn't keep it in their pants and got ten bastard kids running around, then I got a problem. Meanwhile I'm replacing balljoints and shocks twice a year because they can't fix the pot holes littering the roads.:mad:

*Kinda like*, but heavy on the blaming things on the people who have no influence.
Welfare exists because people need it (due to unstable job markets, injuries, etc. legitimate reasons)
Poor people feeding off the system don't exist just because of Welfare. Granted the system is abused by some, but what system isn't. That is not a justification, merely an observation. Welfare should not be abolished simply because it is not an exception to what is probably a rule, especially since there are much greater schemes at work.

And we decide who to put in office by what they promise they'll do. It requires more responsibility of the voters to thoroughly evaluate the candidates and not be emotionally swayed by one hell of a teleprompter reader. The last presidential election was a very emotional, irresponsible one.

What good are voting records and shady alliances when the people prefer to be injected with pretty concepts of hope and other feel-good rhetoric?
Screw financial stability for the working-class, I want to be told I'm already rich and part of something bigger than myself! :rolleyes: (Sarcasm!)

Cam
03-15-2011, 09:02 PM
I find little motivation to cast a vote in any sort of election using a electoral system. We do not call ourselves a republic, but a democracy. This is not entirely true, since we do not use a populous vote for the presidency and our "elected" officials that are in the house and senate are the ones who write, pass, and shoot down laws. We get to vote on stuff that is not quite as important. For instance, we get to vote on the lightrail being built in seattle, because they want to take money from us to build it. But when something comes through that challenges the right of every citizen, like the patriot act, we only hear about it once it is either accepted or in the last stages of going through our "democratic" process.

I don't vote. I most likely never will. I enjoy the united states and a lot of the people here, but there are so many ignorant souls that don't truly understand what is going on.

Democratic or Republican...there's no real choice to be made. One will take money one way, and the others will achieve the same thing in a different fashion. They will both raise the defecit. And they will all vote to raise their pay. We need a new system in the states. But that will never happen without a second american revolution...

Part of me wishes to see that day, but part of me does not want to see the bloodshed that will ensue.

radarwhiz
03-15-2011, 09:31 PM
Well it seems that our comfortable American culture has made us too complacent and passive. We acknowledge the existence of these issues and problems but none of us will ever really do anything about them; what can we do, right. So the most passion anyone will ever see out of us is the griping and whining we do here on the public forums. And if our actual votes don't really even mean that much then what are we accomplishing here? Damn I'm proud to be an American!

NikFu S.
03-15-2011, 09:35 PM
I don't vote. I most likely never will. I enjoy the united states and a lot of the people here, but there are so many ignorant souls that don't truly understand what is going on.

Democratic or Republican...there's no real choice to be made. One will take money one way, and the others will achieve the same thing in a different fashion. They will both raise the defecit. And they will all vote to raise their pay. We need a new system in the states. But that will never happen without a second american revolution...


Man, I have to ask what is your general political leaning? Just humor me for the best answer you can give. I don't really "believe" in this kind of ideological division, but for the purpose of not having to answer stupid questions from ignorant people I say I am Libertarian.

I am trying my best to not be a salesman here, but how can you have this original [before the media and disgruntled right-wingers got a hold of and bastardized it] Tea-Party-esque view without acknowledging the honest or worthwhile candidates out there?

Just to brush off every politician, that is plain lazy. I have been following Ron Paul for the last 4 years and I have never been so committed to a cause. The man is not in the pockets of big business. He actively seeks transparency of government interests in favor of the people. He has one of the most consistent voting records in all of Congress, and earned the nickname (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul) "Dr. No" from his peers for his refusal to ally with even borderline unconstitutional legislation.

From what I have gleaned over the last few years is he is American-centric. I am anti-nationalist but being that I live in this country I feel we should focus on our own problems before fixing others. This is an anti-interventionist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EshFtiHCX20) policy (not isolationist, as that would imply inhibition of free-trade a la N. Korea)
He is a personal Christian. This means he holds his religious values to himself, and only himself which I like as a non-religious person. He is against abortion and drug use, as am I, though we would not force other people to be punished for what they do to their own bodies provided they affect no one else.
He is not anti-corporatist like me, but he is anti-crony capitalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism)" which is good for everyone who isn't a crooked CEO/BoD/etc.
The man is very intelligent and sticks to his guns. He's constantly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vmB5DpHLLo) being (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34OkbWYcCHI) interviewed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVjj03_TYU) even by Fox news whom shunted him during the last election and wrote him off as a lunatic.

[whoops: hit submit before I was done]

Screw it, I either made my point or I didn't. I am tired. I have been fighting this fight for a long time.

He was appointed chairman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChrYizLTbDg) of the Federal Reserve oversight committee, something or other (http://www.dailypaul.com/150811/ron-paul-to-be-appointed-committee-chair-overseeing-federal-reserve), I forgot and didn't save a link (http://dailyreckoning.com/dr-ron-paul-takes-over-chair-of-domestic-monetary-policy-including-fed-oversight/) [fixed! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xo_Nl8H2GI)]. If you think it's hopeless, it isn't. Things are moving in the right direction... slowwwlllyy..

Cam
03-15-2011, 10:38 PM
I have no general leaning. I have views on both sides of the spectrum. I value people that speak their mind, stick to their opinions, listen to others, and are rational. It is tough to find someone that fits that bill. Ron Paul seems like a good person. I have read up on him a little, and what you have claimed is congruent to my findings and readings about him. However, with the current system in place, he will never become president.

I do my part as a citizen by minding my own business. I may not do sit-downs, protests, or write my governor, but where would that get me? On a mailing list, to be drowned in junk mail and political propoganda, or beaten by some cop that feels threatened because he was told to put on riot gear and watch a crowd.

The people I do not respect are those who attempt to control other people without the SOLE PURPOSE of protecting others. A good example would be whoever helped make the seat-belt law (In washington state it is a violation to not wear your seatbelt. You can be pulled over for it, and fined with NO PROOF). How does it hurt someone else if I don't wear my seatbelt? I always wear mine, because it is safer and I do not wish to be ejected through my windshield. Cops should spend their time investigating thefts, assaults, rapes, and other serious crimes. Not writing traffic tickets.

I know I am a little off topic here, but I honestly believe that people should mind their own business. I think that we should also have ALMOST NO federal tax. There is truly very little that the government does for us for the amount of money they take. Then you factor in how they print more money to pay for **** we don't need, wars we don't belong in, 15 year old slu*s to get abortions, drug addicts with 8 children drawing welfare, etc. If I wanted to give homeless people help, I would volunteer at a shelter or give the guy on the corner a few bucks. Those are very noble things indeed. I however, would not voluntarilly give someone 10 bucks, and tell them to give it to the homeless guy down the street.

If you look at the recent history of our government, everything is done for one thing. Money. Let's possibly legalize marijuana, not because people legitimately can use it for pain (without the fear of being addicted physically like you end up using oxycontin), but because we can tax it. Let's go to the middle east, not for WMD's, but for oil. Let's scrap the space shuttle program, not because it's dangerous (a worthwhile danger), but because it's expensive.

OH, AND I LOVE THIS ONE.

Let's make everyone pay for healthcare. We will set up companies (with as much moral direction as ACORN, in all likeliness) that will distribute health insurance. What about people that already have it? We will make them pay taxes on the established value of their plan. What if people refuse? We will make them pay 750 bucks a year to opt out. Just put it in their taxes, if they don't want to pay, we will charge them with tax evasion/fraud. Meanwhile, health care quality will drastically go down the toilet. Lines will get longer, doctors will make less...

Oh, 21 states have already signed petitions? Well, don't forget who holds the VITO card. The law is already in effect. To abolish it means passing a new law, which in turn, could be vito'd with the stroke of a pen. A pen held by the man who used health care reform to be elected.

Okay, enough ranting for now. I am just upset at the way people conduct themselves. How do they sleep at night?:confused:

NikFu S.
03-16-2011, 12:05 AM
Traffic tickets = state income. It's a mafia-like racket under the guise of protection, publicly backed by a few legitimate excuses because people can and do act stupidly.

The whole monetary system in this country makes less an less sense the more I learn about it. People who have money sleep well at night because they can afford fancy pillows, and everyone who wants their own pillows has to spend a few nights in the bed of someone who already does, and the only way you can get to that level is by screwing over as many people as you can. That's how profit is made. You do as little work as cheaply as possible, fool ignorant people into paying you for it, make them think they like it or have no other option, then legislate, buy, or defame your competition or anyone with real sense out of existence.

Luckily there are people out there who aren't just looking out for their own interests. Sadly, we are a minority, and often considered "fringe", ironically, by morons who think that by attaching their mouth to someone's cornhole they are more "free".

A lot of people don't minded eating a gilded turd as long as they can convince people it's a nugget of gold, because image is everything, knowledge is dangerous (and costly).

RojoRocket
03-16-2011, 12:57 AM
The whole monetary system in this country makes less an less sense the more I learn about it. People who have money sleep well at night because they can afford fancy pillows, and everyone who wants their own pillows has to spend a few nights in the bed of someone who already does, and the only way you can get to that level is by screwing over as many people as you can. That's how profit is made. You do as little work as cheaply as possible, fool ignorant people into paying you for it, make them think they like it or have no other option, then legislate, buy, or defame your competition or anyone with real sense out of existence.

Luckily there are people out there who aren't just looking out for their own interests. Sadly, we are a minority, and often considered "fringe", ironically, by morons who think that by attaching their mouth to someone's cornhole they are more "free".

A lot of people don't minded eating a gilded turd as long as they can convince people it's a nugget of gold, because image is everything, knowledge is dangerous (and costly).

*Like**

Glenn Call me a Progressive then. :D

Cam
03-16-2011, 01:29 AM
morons who think that by attaching their mouth to someone's cornhole they are more "free".

:lol: I agree with you completely.

lhopp77
03-16-2011, 10:40 AM
Maybe you could consider listening to something other than FOX News and "hate radio". If you believe that the travesties against collective bargaining in the public sector (including the teachers of your children) and emergency powers granted to their corporate controlled governors that are happening in Wisconsin and Michigan can't effect you it's time you wake up. :(

Glenn

Love it. The far left liberals just HATE Fox news and would like to see them off the air. BUT NAME ONE OTHER NEWS SERVICE THAT WILL PRESENT BOTH SIDES OF AN ISSUE WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH PARTIES??????

AND your brief on the Wisconsin situation shows the usual liberal knee jerk reaction with incomplete knowledge of the legislation. Read it-------It precludes collective bargaining of public employess (those that tax payers pay for) from demanding raises that EXCEED the rate of inflation UNLESS approved by referendum (every one has a voice). Seems fair as hell to me to the taxpayers that pay for these employees. ;)

Lee

lhopp77
03-16-2011, 10:53 AM
BUDGET DEFICITS?????? Seems there are two sides to this equation and not just caused by the "lowering of taxes" indicated above. How about run away spending??????? Several trillions more in long term spending planned than EVER even thought of under previous administrations!!!!! Lower taxes for certain segments of the population CREATES jobs in the private sector while the spending planned by this administration ONLY creates some jobs in the GOVERNMENT sector which we sure as hell don't need. Small businesses create most of the jobs---these are the ones that get hit hardest by higher taxes. When they get hit---they cut workers pay OR lay off workers. So what if they make a million dollars, but own 5 different businesses and hire several hundred employees----increasing their taxes only hurts the job situation and not what they take home for personal use. The tax increase impacts how many they hire, what they pay them AND what they charge US the consumer for whatever it is they make, sell or service they provide.

Lee

RojoRocket
03-16-2011, 11:02 AM
Love it. The far left liberals just HATE Fox news and would like to see them off the air. BUT NAME ONE OTHER NEWS SERVICE THAT WILL PRESENT BOTH SIDES OF AN ISSUE WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH PARTIES??????

AND your brief on the Wisconsin situation shows the usual liberal knee jerk reaction with incomplete knowledge of the legislation. Read it-------It precludes collective bargaining of public employess (those that tax payers pay for) from demanding raises that EXCEED the rate of inflation UNLESS approved by referendum (every one has a voice). Seems fair as hell to me to the taxpayers that pay for these employees. ;)

Lee

I'm sure you've read the bill cover to cover Lee. :rolleyes: Why do you exclude my reference to the tax breaks granted to the rich and corporations while cutting services? And any "fair" debate on FOX is nothing but a sham with the host or other talking head just talking over the "enemy". Looks to this viewer that said "referendums" will soon oust the Govs and numbers of those state's "representatives". "Fundamentalist Conservatives" are constantly cutting off their noses to save face. :tongue:

BTW, all the CAPS in your post certainly go a long way toward making your case. As far as "news", I watch and read a wide variety of programs and publications to form my opinions, based on what I see to be the facts. Unlike many listening to "hate" radio and television, I've actually figured out how to change the station.

Glenn Call me a Progressive

lhopp77
03-16-2011, 01:03 PM
Speaking of ignoring things--waiting for the answer to ANY other network that has reps from boths sides at the same time???????????????? You can't obviously.

As to corporate taxes--I don't think you are as well read as you try to indicate. The US has the the highest corporate taxes in the world and needs to cut them. If you read a little more you will find that corporations now hold billions of dollars in cash offshore, but will not bring them to the US for expansion and expenditure as long as the taxes are inordinately high. Lower the taxes, the money comes back and gets invest here in assets and jobs. Simple.

And I see you admit that you have not read the Wisconsin bill, but merely support what you are told by the liberal press and unions. In another thread on here there has been some discussion about US jobs overseas and poor quality of US autos. Where does the blame for this go---right straight to the unions. Keep them because of seniority and NOT quality of work. Pay them a huge salary for very menial tasks, etc, etc, etc. :eek:

That is like the Arizonia immigration law that the Obama administration is filing suit over. Actually the law only requires Arizonia agencies and companies to ENFORCE CURRENT FEDERAL LAWS. Laws that are already on the books. :rolleyes:

I did not exclude your reference to other tax reductions. The people you make reference to are the ones that create jobs and feed the economy. They much more efficient in growth and creating jobs than the government taking the money and only spending it on government jobs that are self defeating in long term budget deficits.

I also watch many other channels (except rarely MSNBC which is so far out in left field) and other news sources. Again, most do not tell the straight story--usually simply by deletion or not reporting at all. But, I do like to see what is being said by ALL sides. I like to see what the other side is saying unlike far left liberals who can't stand opinions other than theirs. :p

Lee

RojoRocket
03-16-2011, 04:26 PM
Speaking of ignoring things--waiting for the answer to ANY other network that has reps from boths sides at the same time???????????????? You can't obviously.

As to corporate taxes--I don't think you are as well read as you try to indicate. The US has the the highest corporate taxes in the world and needs to cut them. If you read a little more you will find that corporations now hold billions of dollars in cash offshore, but will not bring them to the US for expansion and expenditure as long as the taxes are inordinately high. Lower the taxes, the money comes back and gets invest here in assets and jobs. Simple.

And I see you admit that you have not read the Wisconsin bill, but merely support what you are told by the liberal press and unions. In another thread on here there has been some discussion about US jobs overseas and poor quality of US autos. Where does the blame for this go---right straight to the unions. Keep them because of seniority and NOT quality of work. Pay them a huge salary for very menial tasks, etc, etc, etc. :eek:

That is like the Arizonia immigration law that the Obama administration is filing suit over. Actually the law only requires Arizonia agencies and companies to ENFORCE CURRENT FEDERAL LAWS. Laws that are already on the books. :rolleyes:

I did not exclude your reference to other tax reductions. The people you make reference to are the ones that create jobs and feed the economy. They much more efficient in growth and creating jobs than the government taking the money and only spending it on government jobs that are self defeating in long term budget deficits.

I also watch many other channels (except rarely MSNBC which is so far out in left field) and other news sources. Again, most do not tell the straight story--usually simply by deletion or not reporting at all. But, I do like to see what is being said by ALL sides. I like to see what the other side is saying unlike far left liberals who can't stand opinions other than theirs. :p

Lee

As sarcastically alluded to in my previous post, I tend to ignore anybody YELLING AT ME on the internet. So, your question was answered. "And any "fair" debate on FOX is nothing but a sham with the host or other talking head just talking over the "enemy"." Just because you ask doesn't obligate me to answer in the way you demand.

Where did I admit that I had not read the Wisconsin bill in it's entirety? I doubt that you read the entire bill either, quoting the same condensed version I've seen under a number of sources in the media, and while not claiming to have read through all the legalese involved, you accuse me of claiming to have done so? Typical Greedy Old Party tactics. If you were following what's actually happening in Wisconsin you would see that the Firemen and Police, union and non-union, joined marchers and protesters, although excluded from cancellation of their collective bargaining rights by Gov Walker and his cronies. Maybe you're not as well-read as you claim either? These people actually feel the impact, and know that the same tactics will eventually come to bear on them.

During my working career I was on both sides of the fence, as union member, shop steward, and conversely as a manager of fairly large groups of union, and non union members. As a steward I was obligated to represent people I had no respect for, lousy, dirt-bag employees, as well as good performers unfairly treated by their bosses. This helped me understand what my role was as a supervisor, and manager, following promotion. The Company and it's representatives were not always right either, and sometimes it was necessary to remedy injustice, as well as come down hard when an employee deserved it, firing people on numerous occasions, when due process was followed correctly. Your reference to the US Automakers/Workers "quality problem" leaves out Top Management's mistakes, believing they knew better than anyone what the public wanted in an automobile, blithely putting sub-standard designs into production while reaping bonuses far out of proportion to their contribution. Where were they when that bolt wasn't tightened properly, or part left sitting as the product passed by at speed?

Fact is we're all in this together, watching the top 1% accrue as much wealth and assets as 145,000,000 of us combined. Speaking of "highest corporate taxes in the world", following TARP in 2008, signed into law by none other than "Dubya", Bank of America paid "Zero" taxes in 2009, as well as Citigroup, Boeing, Exxon/Mobil, Wells Fargo and GE. The fat-cats continue to perpetrate corporate fraud on we millions with the recent run-up in gas prices, not driven by simple supply & demand, or "rising world demand" as we're told, but by the speculators with the big capitol, able to pocket more billions and walk away laughing at us, who don't get it.

So, go ahead and defend them Lee, and watch the GOP charlatans give more tax-breaks to the likes of the Koch Brothers, and I would ask you to do one thing. Hold your breath until those folks bring all those new jobs on line, and bring back those billions they now hide off-shore, and pay their fair share.

Glenn

lhopp77
03-17-2011, 10:03 AM
A bit of income tax trivia:

Top 1 percent of income pays over 40% of total taxes

Top 10 percent pays 71% of total taxes

Top 25 percent pays 86% of total taxes

Top 50 percent pays 97% of total taxes

Equals---50 percent pf population does not pay squat???? They just live off the others and it is much of this group that wants to raise taxes on the rich. :rolleyes: :eek:

More:

Of the top 15 RICHEST congress members--10 are Democrats!!!!!!!!!!


(Oh, selective caps is not called "yelling", it's called "emphasis" for the uninformed) :)

Lee:p

radarwhiz
03-17-2011, 10:21 AM
A bit of income tax trivia:

Top 1 percent of income pays over 40% of total taxes

Top 10 percent pays 71% of total taxes

Top 25 percent pays 86% of total taxes

Top 50 percent pays 97% of total taxes

Equals---50 percent pf population does not pay squat???? They just live off the others and it is much of this group that wants to raise taxes on the rich. :rolleyes: :eek:

More:

Of the top 15 RICHEST congress members--10 are Democrats!!!!!!!!!!


(Oh, selective caps is not called "yelling", it's called "emphasis" for the uninformed) :)

Lee:p





http://www.edmontondowntown.com/upload/Like-Button.png

radarwhiz
03-17-2011, 10:40 AM
Just curious, Lee, if you don't mind, which percentile are you in? From what I've seen, it seems that most people who share your opinions tend to fall into the top percent. I most certainly do not and everybody I know would be in the lower end of the bottom 50%. They're all baffled when I explain my views on the subject and don't seem to understand that taxing is based on percetages not just a simple number. For those of us at the bottom, voting for someone who says they'll cut taxes for us only makes us a bit selfish doesn't it? But despite the numbers you pointed out, the bottom 50% claims the largest percent of the population so in order to get elected you sweet-talk that group the most.

icingdeath88
03-17-2011, 11:40 AM
"WHEN AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED, REDEFINE SUCCESS"

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQddpRAGUQcOQT9YyEC6IiZ_fmDvotXS VhGt09xm2x-y99F0hyDQA

(in his signature)

LetItSnow
03-17-2011, 11:50 AM
...paying the welfare checks...
The worst bit of welfare is that its use has completely changed since its inception. Getting one back on one's feet is very different than (when abused) a free ride.

I find little motivation to cast a vote in any sort of election using a electoral system. ... I don't vote. I most likely never will.
At least as long as I live in New York State, I don't really have a reason to vote for this reason. Outside of New York City, the gap between Democrat and Republican is 20k votes - something I can contribute influence to. Beyond that gap, when you add NYC's influence, my support of either major candidate is handily absorbed in the hands of two Democrat voters for each Republican voter. No matter my choice, 29 Electoral College votes are submitted by my state. I may as well watch cartoons and eat cheez doodles instead of stand in line at my designated polling place!

This should also be testimonial to the difference between NYC and Upstate NY, which should be separated by a giant chainsaw for the benefit of both regions.

Traffic tickets = state income.
Ohai, "speeding tax"! Does driving a green Forester hastily constitute tax evasion in its low albeit lofty profile? :lol:

NikFu S.
03-17-2011, 11:53 PM
A bit of income tax trivia:

Top 1 percent of income pays over 40% of total taxes

Top 10 percent pays 71% of total taxes

Top 25 percent pays 86% of total taxes

Top 50 percent pays 97% of total taxes

Equals---50 percent pf population does not pay squat???? They just live off the others and it is much of this group that wants to raise taxes on the rich. :rolleyes: :eek:

More:

Of the top 15 RICHEST congress members--10 are Democrats!!!!!!!!!!


(Oh, selective caps is not called "yelling", it's called "emphasis" for the uninformed) :)

Lee:p

I can't even muster the energy to dignify this absurdity with a well-written and researched response, but the bull**** is easily exposed when we realize the top-taxed people/organizations contain the top tier of wealth.

The lowest tier of paid people are not "not paying squat", they are not being paid squat and therefore bearing a greater burden relative to their income, and I am going out on a very short limb to assume you think this is fair because the rich inherently deserve greater leniency simply due to the fact they are "successful", regardless of whether that success is legitimate, inherited, deceitfully acquired, negligent, or criminal in origin.

Frankly I think you either do not understand simple percentages and ratios (and possibly empathy) or intentionally wish to deceive those whom do not align to your personal interests and I would not put either option very far outside the realm of possibility.

Your argument is based in fallacious misuse of numbers and falls apart as if constructed from carefully placed grains of sand. Apparently stable in a vacuum of [containing no] opposing force, but crumbles at the slightest breeze.

When and if I care to further address any of your other points be sure to have your sources ready. You will need them, this I assure you.


If anyone here thinks the rich are having it more rough than the rest of us, you are either brainwashed or just incredibly stupid, neither option precludes prosperity.
http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://www.alternet.org/economy/145705/the_richest_1%25_have_captured_america%27s_wealth_--_what%27s_it_going_to_take_to_get_it_back

Who do you think writes the laws in this country? Who do you think has immunity from criminal persecution? Who do you think is the cause of the widening wealth disparity of the "classes"? The poor don't control jack ****, the middle class doesn't control half of jack ****, the rich control pretty much everything, and they get their way pretty much everywhere, all the time, provided they don't fall out of favor with their pillow keepers.

http://www.edmontondowntown.com/upload/Like-Button.png

Really, dude?


Ohai, "speeding tax"! Does driving a green Forester hastily constitute tax evasion in its low albeit lofty profile? :lol:

Right, because I said speeding tickets were taxation. That's the same. :rolleyes:

Again, I do not have much energy for this kind of discussion with such a small and potentially unmoving audience, but I hope it was obvious I greatly over-simplified the situation. Abuse varies by district and is subject to the whim of a disgruntled officer whom is bought more by local political "authority", rather than the people they are supposedly hired to serve, which is part of the problem itself.

Here in Anchorage we have it pretty good. Our police force does not appear to be corrupt, I have had and seen nothing but good things about them, but then again they have a lot of real work to do what with clearing out drunk homeless people, mopping up crashes, investigating domestic violence, what have you.

I drive without concern of being pulled over because the police are too busy with real problems. I don't cause them problems, so they don't give a **** if I blast by them on the highway, though I did get a thumbs down recently when I ran a corner a little too hard when it was icy out, they do care. Point is when you are a cop and you have **** to do you don't screw around with innocent people. I highly suspect that in a situation where one is less necessary one finds things to validate their self-imposed importance to society, and if you can do that by writing BS tickets and posturing/goading teenagers and senile people into arguing with you, you will do it.

K_Dub
03-18-2011, 01:24 AM
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."

-Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)

The Republican party was actually once empathetic to the common civilian. They didn't impose their will on the entire country, forcing their religious beliefs down the throats of a diverse population. Anyone who claims to want "small government" while denouncing a woman's right to choose, or freedom of religion has their perspective skewed.

To me, the modern Republican party represents small government only insofar as to not spend any money on domestic jobs. Big intrusion into every aspect of personal life, higher spending on war, cutting taxes for the rich while imposing the burden on the middle and lower class are in no way conservative ideals.

Remember; these "freeloaders" are American citizens, and deserve to eat and receive healthcare just as much as you, regardless of ethnicity. If we can find Billions of dollars in our budget to kill foreigners in their home country, and pad the bonuses of Wall Street fat-cats, then it seems like taking care of our own nation's destitute shouldn't be such an issue.

November 7, 2000 was the day that Democracy died in America. It will never be the same after that. We all know that "One Man, One Vote" works for other countries, but for some reason we can't get that right ourselves. I voted only once since then, but that was just to ensure that Palin didn't get within 100 yards of the White House. I didn't like the guy I voted for any more than McCain, just picked the lesser of two evils under any contingency.

As a self employed freelance worker with no union representation that puts me in a unique demographic. I pay almost 50% of my annual income in taxes, while being without health insurance or the eligibility to partake in the programs that I fund. That does not mean that I feel that we should cancel these programs just because I'll never get my share, that would be down right greedy. Ike would not approve.

NikFu: Like.:)

With that, I end my 15 hour work day (of which I only get paid for 8 because I'm on a flat rate at this company).

radarwhiz
03-18-2011, 07:30 AM
you either do not understand simple percentages and ratios (and possibly empathy) or intentionally wish to deceive those whom do not align to your personal interests

I suppose you would like to states to charge higher sales tax to the wealthy when they go to the grociery store or buy a car or gas because that would be "empathetic" to the "less fortunate". This is the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY where you're free to live your dream, work hard and earn as much money as you can and if you're successful enough we'll take it from you and hand it out to those who aren't. Can anyone say SOCIALISM?

NikFu S.
03-18-2011, 11:24 AM
I suppose you would like to states to charge higher sales tax to the wealthy when they go to the grociery store or buy a car or gas because that would be "empathetic" to the "less fortunate". This is the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY where you're free to live your dream, work hard and earn as much money as you can and if you're successful enough we'll take it from you and hand it out to those who aren't. Can anyone say SOCIALISM?

Following your current train of thought will lead you to fully manufactured straw man or red herring fallacy.

Your "taxing the rich because the poor aren't living the dream is socialism" argument is a fallacious one for many, many reasons, most of which I have no desire to delve into.

Firstly, sir, your cries of that evil ideology fall onto unwavering ears as you are likely well aware [re: in denial] of the socialist nature of many government and civilian institutions. Someone who gives a damn will be sure to chime in. I don't.

Secondly, you have by design omitted the cronyism rampant in today's capitalistic structure. This is a sign of either true ignorance, or complacency with the capitalist oligarchy, which is something of which I am willing to inform you.

I have to leave right now, but the gist of what I will explain to you is that the nations powers are not where they were designed to be by the writers of the Constitution. It is not supposed to be in the pockets of corporations. I understand if you think that is fair because "if you work for and aqcuire something you deserve it", but that is a selfish and greedy and wholly anti-progress, anti-freedom sentiment.

Thank you, BRB.

K_Dub
03-18-2011, 12:45 PM
I suppose you would like to states to charge higher sales tax to the wealthy when they go to the grociery store or buy a car or gas because that would be "empathetic" to the "less fortunate". This is the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY where you're free to live your dream, work hard and earn as much money as you can and if you're successful enough we'll take it from you and hand it out to those who aren't. Can anyone say SOCIALISM?

I like Ike. In 1958-1959 the nation entered a steep recession. All too aware of what can and did happen only 30 years earlier, Ike had to do something. He imposed a 91% capital gains tax on the highest bracket earners. The economy stabilized, the GDP soared and the average American family enjoyed a 20% increase in annual income.

Don't call Ike a commie though, his ghost will come kick your butt. ;)

This time around, when the economy tanked we gave Billions to that same demographic, hoping they'd somehow overcome the greed that brought down the system and invest in the working class out of the goodness of their hearts. How's that working out so far?

Also, anyone who claims to believe in a free market, but also thinks that tax laws should guide the economy needs a perspective check.

RojoRocket
03-18-2011, 01:50 PM
I like Ike. In 1958-1959 the nation entered a steep recession. All too aware of what can and did happen only 30 years earlier, Ike had to do something. He imposed a 91% capital gains tax on the highest bracket earners. The economy stabilized, the GDP soared and the average American family enjoyed a 20% increase in annual income.

Don't call Ike a commie though, his ghost will come kick your butt. ;)

This time around, when the economy tanked we gave Billions to that same demographic, hoping they'd somehow overcome the greed that brought down the system and invest in the working class out of the goodness of their hearts. How's that working out so far?

Also, anyone who claims to believe in a free market, but also thinks that tax laws should guide the economy needs a perspective check.

LIKE!

Maybe Lee can jump in here with some more of his GOP website numbers. :rolleyes:

Glenn Call me a Progressive

LetItSnow
03-18-2011, 02:01 PM
Right, because I said speeding tickets were taxation. That's the same. :rolleyes:
Whimsical figure of speech is a wh--

Oh, forget it.

NikFu S.
03-18-2011, 03:17 PM
Phew, I was afraid you were going to argue with me.

This kind of discussion gets me a little offensive.

LIKE!
+2

RojoRocket
03-18-2011, 03:51 PM
Phew, I was afraid you were going to argue with me.

This kind of discussion gets me a little offensive.


+2

Not at all Nik! Very eloquently stated! +1 to you as well. :cool:

Glenn

RojoRocket
03-18-2011, 03:56 PM
This in the news today:
Judge Blocks Wisconsin Law on Union Bargaining
By MONICA DAVEY
Published: March 18, 2011

CHICAGO — A judge issued a temporary restraining order on Friday that prevents Wisconsin’s new law cutting collective bargaining rights for public workers from taking effect, at least for now.
The decision, issued by Judge Maryann Sumi of the Dane County Circuit Court, temporarily bars Wisconsin’s secretary of state from publishing the controversial law, one of the procedural requirements for it to come into effect in the state. Publication had been expected late next week, but Judge Sumi’s ruling delays that until at least March 29, when she plans to hold a full hearing on a lawsuit that questions the validity of the collective bargaining law based on the speedy manner in which it was carried out earlier this month.
An appeal is possible even before then.

I'm sure Beck, Rimbaugh et al are already rallying the $$$$ to fight this. :rolleyes:

Glenn Call me a Progressive

NikFu S.
03-18-2011, 06:43 PM
That whole Wisconsin deal has fierce protest from both sides, its easy to fall for the punditry.

The best argument I've heard yet is that even though the unions may be a bit crummy what little power they wield is being turned over to the elites. What more motivation do you need to oppose Mr. Walker's bill.

sunvalleyray
03-19-2011, 05:02 PM
Following your current train of thought will lead you to fully manufactured straw man or red herring fallacy.

Your "taxing the rich because the poor aren't living the dream is socialism" argument is a fallacious one for many, many reasons, most of which I have no desire to delve into.

Firstly, sir, your cries of that evil ideology fall onto unwavering ears as you are likely well aware [re: in denial] of the socialist nature of many government and civilian institutions. Someone who gives a damn will be sure to chime in. I don't.

Secondly, you have by design omitted the cronyism rampant in today's capitalistic structure. This is a sign of either true ignorance, or complacency with the capitalist oligarchy, which is something of which I am willing to inform you.

I have to leave right now, but the gist of what I will explain to you is that the nations powers are not where they were designed to be by the writers of the Constitution. It is not supposed to be in the pockets of corporations. I understand if you think that is fair because "if you work for and aqcuire something you deserve it", but that is a selfish and greedy and wholly anti-progress, anti-freedom sentiment.

Thank you, BRB.



Think Professor Paul Wooley from the London School of Economics would agree. Great article in The New Yorker - http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/29/101129fa_fact_cassidy?printable=true regarding the false assumptions that the market is efficient.

I have been away on a business road trip and see that several people still believe, as I once did, that the free market system is exactly that - free, efficient and fair. Read Professor Wooley's theory and then let's discuss.

Regarding who pays what in taxes...give me 90% of all income and I will pay 99% in taxes and still be super rich. The real issue is what is a fair rate of taxation not how much one pays. Statistics can be very misleading...93% of all lesbians are woman etc. meaning one can prove almost anything quoting numbers. Remember 87% of all tax payers make less than $100,000 a year!

I think the middle class is disappearing and that the American dream is a myth being sold to us by the super rich, like the owner of Fox News or the financiers of the Tea Party - the Koch Brothers.

Ray

NikFu S.
03-19-2011, 06:25 PM
Speaking of the Koch brothers...

you hear much about the supposed boycott of Koch-owned paper products that was supposed to go down? I was all for it until I realized I didn't buy any of that stuff anyway, but one argument I heard against it was that the boycotting of goods like this hurts the lower end of the job market, and I agree, it does.
That's the price you pay for working for a company that does whatever it does to have people rallying against it.

But less on that point and more to the general point I had just thought of, borrowing from the earlier argument that someone had made on motor companies failing resulting in too much job loss...


[here it comes]

where is the outcry from these same people when jobs are lost in a more legitimate manner of enterprising?

I'm talking about things like Netflix and downloadable/streamable movies and TV series. Has not this recent trend all but laid waste to companies like Blockbuster and their lesser-known competitors? Where are the bailouts for them?

I would never argue for a Blockbuster bailout but when I notice the blatant hypocrisy of people to "worry" about jobs that are "stolen" from innocent people through politically-inspired movements yet remain silent when something arguably great (from an immediate consumer perspective) merely overtakes something obsolete... I just can not keep a firm grasp on that person's credibility as it begins to trickle out of my hands.

RojoRocket
03-19-2011, 09:36 PM
Think Professor Paul Wooley from the London School of Economics would agree. Great article in The New Yorker - http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/29/101129fa_fact_cassidy?printable=true regarding the false assumptions that the market is efficient.

I have been away on a business road trip and see that several people still believe, as I once did, that the free market system is exactly that - free, efficient and fair. Read Professor Wooley's theory and then let's discuss.

Regarding who pays what in taxes...give me 90% of all income and I will pay 99% in taxes and still be super rich. The real issue is what is a fair rate of taxation not how much one pays. Statistics can be very misleading...93% of all lesbians are woman etc. meaning one can prove almost anything quoting numbers. Remember 87% of all tax payers make less than $100,000 a year!

I think the middle class is disappearing and that the American dream is a myth being sold to us by the super rich, like the owner of Fox News or the financiers of the Tea Party - the Koch Brothers.

Ray

Thank you Ray. Excellent reading, although a very sad tale of our current times, and the unbridled greed running rampant in the land. Very sad indeed.:(

Glenn Call me one of the 87%

LetItSnow
03-19-2011, 10:43 PM
...companies like Blockbuster and their lesser-known competitors...
Their influence in the GDP and employment of skilled workers hardly compares to even lowly Chrysler. Most Blockbuster employees aren't trying to keep a family fed with their income. :eek:

NikFu S.
03-20-2011, 01:07 AM
I anticipated that point would be made but I offer no retort.

I only question the imposed importance of and resulting exaggerated effects of so called too-big-to-fail companies.

Jobs are jobs. Everything is temporary, unless it is stagnant. Jobs lost through failure are only jobs temporarily lost. Market remains. Jobs lost through the introduction of more efficient technology (i.e. automation) are terminal.

The robotic automation of automobile (and other) factories has also "replaced" or made obsolete many skilled workers, and while some companies reached out and remain "fully staffed", that is a distraction from the point I am making that it is a fact jobs will be lost as greater efficiency is achieved, as less work, energy, resources, or funding is required to create the same result.

If one desires progress of efficiency, one must accept a surplus of laborers will be created. This can be avoided if the parent company creates new work, which it can do at the expense/risk of revenue.

If one desires a constipated workforce (for reasons of morality/statistics?), one must favor or emphasize stagnation in the sense that production ideally can't change. If it decreases, jobs are lost without creating efficiency. If it increases, demand must have already increased or there will be a product surplus which will inevitably lower prices, costing revenue in not one but two ways; resources consumed and stores over-supplied.

One way to increase demand: increase population, but this by nature will cause unemployment statistics to rise, but without that pesky factor of "job loss" morality. Sales are increased through welfare if wares are cheap.

Second way: self-degrading, rapidly-obsolescent wares, where the burden is shouldered by the front store, not the manufacturer. This only prolongs production stagnation. Both money and resources (the unsold wares) are depleted at no return, but at no loss to the manufacturer. Loss minimized through reclamation.

Third way: Create necessity. This can be done through covert legal means, advertising, franchising (i.e. Disney+McToys). Burden may be shouldered by the consumer. Negative effect: increased potential for counter-legislation, bad press, lawsuits. Need well-paid PR team of loyal patsies.

Increasing energy/tooling/logistics efficiency creates great manufacturing returns at the cost of jobs (due to redundancy). This in my opinion is only detrimental in that sense. Resources are better off. Manufacturer is better off. Front-stores are better off. Consumers are better off. Reputation can go either way depending on media coverage. Former workers and families will protest. Sympathizers will protest. Longevity of company is assured until next upgrade re-evaluation.


Boy I am tired. What the hell am I rambling about?

Anyway, efficiency leads to a "jobless", cashless, possibly technocratic Star Trek-like society.

Corporatism will eventually self-destruct any system incorporating it unless it can simultaneously manage various renewable resources (fresh water/sunlight/tides/fertile grounds/etc, but this leads to basic public lands resource acquisitions which is little more than corporo-capitalistic feudalism. Ya dig?

I guess the main point under the train wreck of all the other points I have so far avoided making is if a giant corporation in this day fails, it is because the system is demanding a re-evaluation of a certain efficiency. In the case of the auto-makers, as I have stated earlier, less emphasis on over-production of mediocre quality vehicles, more adaptation for future-proofing the consumer. Ford has taken steps with a great Hybrid vehicle, the Fusion Hybrid, and the soon-coming Focus Electric which is both fantastically electric, yet sadly a Focus.
Production is maintained with electric cars. Infrastructure is expensive but available. Efficiency (health/resource) is gained through the lack of a need for gasoline/oil on the consumer end.

If you think I am wrong, tell Ford, BMW, Chevy, Toyota, whoever to stop producing electric vehicles. If you think they are not viable, I will be happy to continue rambling, as apparently I do it even without the intention.
Thanks for tl;dr. =D

stevek
03-20-2011, 02:52 PM
Having read through all the posts on this I reckon there can't be many forums with such erudite and succinct replies. You guys should be running the country, and mine too please!
In the UK, I'm surprised that we are all suffering, seemingly, from the action of others in this recession without rebellion. Maybe it's coming. One inescapable fact remains though, if the rich haven't got richer how come Ferrari had their best ever sales in 2010?
How come my bank chooses to help small businesses by doubling my o/d interest rate and increasing the 'arrangement fee' whilst recording a monster 48% margin on business lending? Risk free, I may add, as they have increased the security stranglehold on my genitalia.

Sorry, I'll get back to the Euro Forum section now and behave myself.

RojoRocket
03-20-2011, 04:24 PM
NikFu
Boy I am tired. What the hell am I rambling about?

Like! LOL!! You need to get more rest buddy.


Having read through all the posts on this I reckon there can't be many forums with such erudite and succinct replies. You guys should be running the country, and mine too please!
In the UK, I'm surprised that we are all suffering, seemingly, from the action of others in this recession without rebellion. Maybe it's coming. One inescapable fact remains though, if the rich haven't got richer how come Ferrari had their best ever sales in 2010?
How come my bank chooses to help small businesses by doubling my o/d interest rate and increasing the 'arrangement fee' whilst recording a monster 48% margin on business lending? Risk free, I may add, as they have increased the security stranglehold on my genitalia.

Sorry, I'll get back to the Euro Forum section now and behave myself.

Like! Stick around stevek! Everyone's welcome in here. Good to hear an opinion from across the pond, and know we're all in this together.

Glenn Call me "Going Broke"

sunvalleyray
03-21-2011, 09:55 AM
Like! LOL!! You need to get more rest buddy.




Like! Stick around stevek! Everyone's welcome in here. Good to hear an opinion from across the pond, and know we're all in this together.

Glenn Call me "Going Broke"

Now for some humor - http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14837.htm

RojoRocket
03-21-2011, 11:13 AM
Always loved Carlin. But I'm not laughing this time. :(

Glenn

sunvalleyray
03-21-2011, 06:40 PM
Always loved Carlin. But I'm not laughing this time. :(

Glenn

I feel the same way.

Ray

RojoRocket
03-21-2011, 06:51 PM
Well, if nothing else I've joined the Info Clearing House and look forward to hearing some daily, NO B.S. news. Thank you Ray.

Glenn Call me PI$$ED!! :lol:

stevek
03-22-2011, 04:42 PM
Seeing as how you folk have kindly let me join in this discussion (you may well regret it!) I had an invoice today from the 'Performing Rights Society' for £140. This is to enable me to have the radio on, legally, for customers and staff members to listen to for a year. The PRS is a 'non profit making' organisation. It has several directors earning £300,000.00+ a year though. The vast majority of it's income, after costs such as mentioned, go to about 5% of member artists.

(If these facts are wrong, PRS, please put me straight).

Do you have an organisation like this in America?

K_Dub
03-22-2011, 05:33 PM
Seeing as how you folk have kindly let me join in this discussion (you may well regret it!) I had an invoice today from the 'Performing Rights Society' for £140. This is to enable me to have the radio on, legally, for customers and staff members to listen to for a year. The PRS is a 'non profit making' organisation. It has several directors earning £300,000.00+ a year though. The vast majority of it's income, after costs such as mentioned, go to about 5% of member artists.

(If these facts are wrong, PRS, please put me straight).

Do you have an organisation like this in America?

I guess this would be analogous to BMI, which handles the licensing for musical recordings. The difference is in where the "dues" get payed; here it is paid by the stations in order to play the track. The problem is that these fees have risen to such a degree that only major media outlets can publicly play music. These companies, like Clear Channel, just took on the independent Internet radio providers with backing from BMI to drive them out of business (billing guys with music blogs millions retroactively for having freely played music for years). Many died off, while some of the bigger outlets like Pandora Radio changed to a pay/commercial model to stay afloat. As an artist I sure am grateful to these millionaires for keeping the world safe from emerging talent. Just imagine what media darlings like Justin Beiber would do if they actually had to compete with talented but unsigned musicians on a level playing field.

On another note. The 'lil lady and I were stopped at a light and she pointed out a gov't truck with "Civilian Conservation Corps" badges on the side. I didn't know that program still existed, but the two guys in the truck sure seemed happy to be working today. I was going to call them "freeloading commies" but they seemed pretty tough, so I let them slide. Just don't let me catch them building any dams or bridges in my canyon, we like our roads like we like our government: unpredictable and subject to closure.

RojoRocket
03-22-2011, 10:32 PM
Seeing as how you folk have kindly let me join in this discussion (you may well regret it!) I had an invoice today from the 'Performing Rights Society' for £140. This is to enable me to have the radio on, legally, for customers and staff members to listen to for a year. The PRS is a 'non profit making' organisation. It has several directors earning £300,000.00+ a year though. The vast majority of it's income, after costs such as mentioned, go to about 5% of member artists.

(If these facts are wrong, PRS, please put me straight).

Do you have an organisation like this in America?

Steve,
As Kit stated BMI is in the same "business". My Brother-in-Law owns and operates 2 pizza parlors, and had two "gents" walk in a few weeks ago attempting to shake him down for some hundreds of dollars IIRC, because he plays music in the background at his businesses. He refused to play, stating that he pays fees to "XM Radio" in one parlor and "Muzack" in the other for said music, and saw no reason to pay some 3rd party when he was already "covered" by his monthly dues. They left without a fuss, but made him wonder how many folks just pony up the $$, and felt like he was being scammed until he was able to check the organization out.

Here in California we have a rather "infamous" charlatan in a wheelchair that goes around suing small business owners over our ADA laws. That's "Americans with Disabilities Act" statutes that require everything from specific dimensions in the stalls in the rest-rooms to accommodate wheelchair bound customers, to ramps to give an alternative to stairs, raised platforms, etc etc. This individual has actually caused a number of small businesses to shut down because their physical locations and space available made it impossible to meet the requirements, sometimes necessitating elevator installation to comply. Do you also have such regs?

Glenn

lhopp77
04-06-2011, 11:59 AM
Very Troubling.......

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41293760/ns/politics-more_politics/

And before some of you point to the good Clinton years, remember that Republicans controlled Congress or the bad last Bush years when Democrats controlled Congress.

Now if this does not bother you---you "ain't" as intelligent as I thought you were. :p

Lee

stevek
12-31-2011, 10:25 PM
@ RojoRocket
Very sorry for the slowest reply in internet history. So far, disabled access litigation hasn't made news here, yet. Someone once told me that we are about 10 years behind your lead, so who knows..

Happy New Year to you all!