Go gop!!!!!!!!

[hammer3rd]

Almost got it back. 2 more years!!!!!!!!!!

[4literranger485]

i'll drink to that!

[Dr_Snooz]

All hail plutocracy!

[hammer3rd]

Well how has the next term been!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ecogabriel]

Yeah, the Koch brothers got it back from the Wall Street gang

[nswst8]

It's not that I back the GOP, it's that I'll cast my vote to stop the current idiot in office.

[Dr_Snooz]

Please. You can put any idiot in that you want. Nothing will change.

[stat1K]

^ ding ding ding

[Vanilla Sky]

The President, for the most part, is nothing more than a talking head. It doesn't matter who it is, nor does it matter which party they are aligned with.

People should stop voting for a party. Vote for the individual candidate that has views aligned with your own. Stop buying into party politics, and we might just get out country back.

[nswst8]

Please. You can put any idiot in that you want. Nothing will change.

I don't side with either party, I vote as an independent using common sense to judge the direction of this country. This country needs a leader that unites the country not divide it. To get the congress and senate to work together for the common good of all people of the United States, not just one side over the other.

[Vanilla Sky]

I don't side with either party, I vote as an independent using common sense to judge the direction of this country. This country needs a leader that unites the country not divide it. To get the congress and senate to work together for the common good of all people of the United States, not just one side over the other.

3geez needs a "like" button.

[2drSE-i]

As embarrassed as I am to admit it, I voted Obama in 2008 because I thought he was what this country needed. Unfortunately, he was wreckless, hopeless and didn't even try to "change" anything. The system is broken, and no one can fix it. Especially Obomney. Our last "hope" was Dr. Paul, and I doubt even he could have done anything.

[nswst8]

The people need to hold the politicians accountable for the direction of the country. That is how you fix a broken goverment. When enough of them get voted out the message will be heard and addressed.

That is why you must be an informed voter. Good, bad or indifferent, make a decision.

I can survive any administration, can you? I have learned over the years how to get my money to work for me, have you?

[Vanilla Sky]

Money means nothing to me. I couldn't care less if the economy collapsed, not that I want it to. That doesn't mean that I do want the country to collapse into anarchy, but I would like to see things happen that I don't see happening with a socially conservative government.

You really can't blame the president for everything, especially what he walked into. He was set up to fail, and if the coin would have landed on the other side, I feel that the same exact thing would have happened. Remember, it's easy to blame the guy you don't like.

[2oodoor]

Just when I get an understanding of partisan politics, it evades me again.

Nobody is who they portray themselves to be, and Mitt is about as insincere as one can get.
He lost my attention the day he said something about eating grits, just because he was in Alabama. Then he starts wearing blue jeans all over the campaign trail. They're dad jeans just like Obama's ...it's all smoke and mirrors from just another narcissistic personality shape shifting to get what he wants.

Presidential elections seem to be always the lesser of the evils come voting time.

[cygnus x-1]

This country needs a leader that unites the country not divide it. To get the congress and senate to work together for the common good of all people of the United States, not just one side over the other.

The problem is that everyone has their own idea of what the "common good" is, and the two major parties have lost the ability (or willingness) or to compromise.





You really can't blame the president for everything, especially what he walked into. He was set up to fail, and if the coin would have landed on the other side, I feel that the same exact thing would have happened.

This is largely true, although he kind of set himself up to fail by making a lot of promises that he could never deliver on. Taking on healthcare was probably not the best idea either given the state of the economy. And ramming through a huge piece of legislation by brute force is not exactly the way to compromise.




The people need to hold the politicians accountable for the direction of the country. That is how you fix a broken goverment. When enough of them get voted out the message will be heard and addressed.


Will it really?


C|

[cygnus x-1]

Presidential elections seem to be always the lesser of the evils come voting time.


Anyone remember this?

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154582/debate-2004


C|

[Vanilla Sky]

This is largely true, although he kind of set himself up to fail by making a lot of promises that he could never deliver on. Taking on healthcare was probably not the best idea either given the state of the economy. And ramming through a huge piece of legislation by brute force is not exactly the way to compromise.

Agreed. I will say that empty promises come from all sides in every major election, though. Not that I'm giving anyone a pass here, but everyone does it. These days, it's how you win an election, especially when most of the population is more concerned with voting for American Idol than voting in the election. I was truly hoping the Occupy movement would get enough young people interested in politics that we'd have a chance in the future, but that fizzled out about the time I started hearing it called the "Democratic TEA Party" like the TEA Party itself did when the Republicans co-opted their message. Prior to that, I genuinely hoped that the TEA party would lobby to regain some of our rights that are eroding every day.

[nswst8]

We always have to go through a number of knuckle heads before we finally get someone worth a frack. Keep the faith.

Now if you are one of those that believes the goverment owes you a living, then I'm your biggest obsticle because it is my tax dollars that the goverment uses for entitlememnt spending mentality.

You will never put a harness upon my back to carry dead fracking weight.

[Vanilla Sky]

I consider myself to be socially liberal, but very very very fiscally conservative, at least when it comes to money we're forced to fork over to support and fund things that I don't personally agree with.

The only way the government owes me a living is if I work directly for them.

[DBMaster]

There you go. Until we decide to think about the common good and take responsibility for our own actions we will always be disappointed. "Big Daddy" government cannot fix everything that's wrong and there will never be a solution to a problem that everyone likes. I do like the foundation of libertarianism, but Ron Paul couldn't even put together a coherent sentence. Obama makes a good showing in public and, much as you may not want to agree, he has done a lot of what he set out to do.

There is so much sensationalism and outright mistruth presented to us by the media. You practically have to read every news source and still decide for yourself.

It's pretty much like The Who song, "Don't Get Fooled Again." ...new boss, same as the old boss.

I really didn't want to allow myself to get dragged into this. But, think about this. When we were kids lots of our parents thought it would be really cool if their child someday became President of the United States. How many of us would wish that on our kids, or even our worst enemy? This country has lost respect for the office and that has resulted in suspicion, mistrust, and government gridlock. What's more important, beating the dead horse of Obama's birthplace, or actually letting him do the job we actually elected him to do? OMG, this country is fucked up!

[2drSE-i]

LOL http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1010/the-buck-stops-obama-blames-bush-obama-sucks-obama-really-su-political-poster-1286925344.jpg

Don't get me wrong, Obama was set up for failure (just as Bush was) but he can take plenty of blame for the crap he's pulled.



Not that any of them are in it for the best interest of the country. Politics has been a job since Washington.

[Dr_Snooz]

Now if you are one of those that believes the goverment owes you a living, then I'm your biggest obsticle because it is my tax dollars that the goverment uses for entitlememnt spending mentality.

You will never put a harness upon my back to carry dead fracking weight.

Weren't you career military?

[nswst8]

Weren't you career military?

9 years 9 months active duty. So what are you implying? You consider military service an entitlement mentality.

[stat1K]

i think the phrase entitlement is way overused and abused.

i like that social security has become an "entitlement" not like the people paid in or anything. I like that union contracts are "entitlements" not like something that was preagreed upon.

I also like picking and choosing of entitlement claims.

[cygnus x-1]

I do like the foundation of libertarianism, but Ron Paul couldn't even put together a coherent sentence.

I do too, and you're right. RP just sounded too much like a crackpot (even if he wasn't).



Obama makes a good showing in public and, much as you may not want to agree, he has done a lot of what he set out to do.

I do give him credit for thinking big. And to be honest I actually dislike congress more than Obama. Nancy Pelosi for example really hurts my brain.




There is so much sensationalism and outright mistruth presented to us by the media. You practically have to read every news source and still decide for yourself.

Because the media is about money and ratings, not honest reporting. The major cable news channels are a complete waste of time. PBS has some decent programming. They do lean left at times but at least there is some intelligent conversation. The Wall street Journal is decent too, but I only read when I go over to the parents house.




It's pretty much like The Who song, "Don't Get Fooled Again." ...new boss, same as the old boss.

One of my favorites!



This country has lost respect for the office and that has resulted in suspicion, mistrust, and government gridlock.

Actually I think it's the other way around, but yes, mistrust and gridlock rule today.



What's more important, beating the dead horse of Obama's birthplace, or actually letting him do the job we actually elected him to do? OMG, this country is fucked up!

I blame much of this on sensationalist media. It's easier and cheaper to fill the time with over-dramatized simplistic issues than it is to present well thought out material and honest discussion. And people respond more readily to emotional content than they do to intellectual content.




I consider myself to be socially liberal, but very very very fiscally conservative, at least when it comes to money we're forced to fork over to support and fund things that I don't personally agree with.

The only way the government owes me a living is if I work directly for them.

If they are going to tax us to death then they certainly owe us *something*. I think most people don't mind so much paying taxes if they think they are getting something of value for their money. But given the way our government is perceived now I can see why people are not so happy.



Agreed. I will say that empty promises come from all sides in every major election, though. Not that I'm giving anyone a pass here, but everyone does it. These days, it's how you win an election, especially when most of the population is more concerned with voting for American Idol than voting in the election. I was truly hoping the Occupy movement would get enough young people interested in politics that we'd have a chance in the future, but that fizzled out about the time I started hearing it called the "Democratic TEA Party" like the TEA Party itself did when the Republicans co-opted their message. Prior to that, I genuinely hoped that the TEA party would lobby to regain some of our rights that are eroding every day.

Oh yeah. Politics as usual.



i think the phrase entitlement is way overused and abused.

Sensationalist media again...



i like that social security has become an "entitlement" not like the people paid in or anything.

A valid point. The problem with SS is that people live way longer now than they did when the program was started. The age at which you can collect needs to be increased to match current life expectancy. OR people need to pay in more so they can collect earlier and for longer.

But really the bigger issue is what happened to the money? From what I understand the SS program would have plenty of money if the covernment wouldn't have spent it on other things.



I like that union contracts are "entitlements" not like something that was preagreed upon.

Also a fair point. However when one side holds overwhelming power, the term agreement get a bit stretched.


C|

[Dr_Snooz]

9 years 9 months active duty. So what are you implying? You consider military service an entitlement mentality.

And then made a bundle working contract gigs for the government?

I just think that people who live off the government probably shouldn't complain about people who live off the government.

That's all I'll say for now.

[DBMaster]

Oh, my, I can feel it getting hotter in here already, Snooz.

I am starting to think the word "entitlement" should just be eliminated from daily use.

Here is my definition. If you receive money for doing nothing, and contributed nothing to get it, it is an entitlement. When the members of the group collecting start believing in their hearts that the money is a birthright and no longer appreciate it, it is an entitlement.

[nswst8]

And then made a bundle working contract gigs for the government?

I just think that people who live off the government probably shouldn't complain about people who live off the government.

That's all I'll say for now.

Really? So you are saying that people who choose to volunteer for military service and risk life and limbs for this country, shouldn't speak as to the direction of this country?

That is some really profound bullshit.

[nswst8]

It's real simple guys, the economy of the last 30 years is gone and there is no bringing it back. The country screwed up not putting away the extra revenue for when the economy would start to contract. We had a economic bubble that everyone should have known wouldn't last. We are in a flatline economy.

You can bit*h about it, will it do you any good? Think about it real hard.

The era of the personal computer/cell phone/dot com/5000 NASDAQ/Y2K/housing bubble is gone. The supply has met the demand. Fortunes made and lost.

The contracts that were negotiated with unions are not sustainable, they were negotiated under an economic bubble by politicians only concerned with election / re-election. Either concessions need to be negotiated by the union members, otherwise we are headed for a lost economic decade like Japan. "THERE IS NO CASH COW ON THE HORIZION" that I can see.

For those that want to model the United States economy after Europe's economy. The hell with that!

Smaller cities faced with the possibility of bankruptcy and have filed for bankruptcy have cut back into the bone of their budgets austeirty measures are already taking place. They are contracting city work out to private companies who get the job done faster and on budget. They put the responsibility of retirement back into the hands of the worker.

I expect this to be the way larger cities start to reform their budgets. Union members need to read the writing on the wall and get their financial house in order. Otherwise face layoffs in the near future unlike anything you have seen lately.

You can debate all you like or you can start to prepare which ever way you can to reduce the impact of this economy. It's your choice, choose wisely.

[cygnus x-1]

I just think that people who live off the government probably shouldn't complain about people who live off the government.


That's not quite the same thing. When you work for the government (this includes military service) you are trading your labor for money, just the same as any other occupation. Your employer just happens to be the government. An entitlement implies a right to something without any payment for said thing.

In fact I would almost expect government workers to be more angry about the idea of entitlement than non-government workers, because government workers have to work for their pay, instead of simply getting something for free.

As also stated by others, I think the word "entitlement" probably is overused/misused, leading to more confusion. So lets throw down the gauntlet and prove we can have a civilized discussion.

What do you (anyone) consider an entitlement and why do you believe it is such?


C|

[ecogabriel]

It's real simple guys, the economy of the last 30 years is gone and there is no bringing it back.

Four deformations of the Apocalypse: the piece that David Stockman wrote some time ago summarizes what is wrong with one half of the political system or at least with their economic "philosophy"

FYI, Stockman was the Director of the Office of Management under Reagan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html?pagewanted=all

[DBMaster]

Hmm. Maybe a good president is like a good king/queen. It should be someone who presents well and is impressive. We should not expect this person to do the work, rather, to delegate it to competent subordinates. THAT IS a good president. Reagan was often referred to as "The Master Delegator." Perhaps I should rethink my lack of awe for Reagan. After all, I WAS a college student in the 1980's and therefore am required to dis the government that existed at the time. I think we all agree that when we listen to either candidate saying what they are going to do we KNOW they can't do it. We are delusional. We all live in "interesting times."

[nswst8]

At 17, a new recruit. Reagan to me was a great guy. He gave the military an 11% pay raise across the board which allowed alot of guys (my dad) to stop working second jobs in addition to their military duties to support their families. He brought out a plan that both broke the back of the USSR, put americans back to work with the 600 ship Navy we pulled every ship that was sitting in dry dock to be refitted and put back into service. Dropped capital gains tax down from 70% which pumped money into the economy.

And the most important in my opinion the main factor that the hostages were released from the Irainians.

Now he had his flaws but don't we all. Who is perfect?

He also enjoyed the era of the invention of the personal computer which launch an economic boom in the electronic age.

Of course at the time I was most importantly looking for easy ladies and easier money opportunities.

Again just my opinion of the man in his time.

[DBMaster]

"Looking for easy ladies and easier money opportunities."

Now, that is a statement I can get behind! :)

You know how it is. Politicians get to take credit for the good stuff and blame somebody else for the not-so-good stuff. That part will never change.

The way that the USSR was broken, IMO, was purely economical. They got stuck in a quagmire in Afghanistan (sound familiar?) all while trying to outspend the U.S. on military equipment. Basically, our credit card had a higher limit than theirs.

If you wish to see the results of living in a true entitlement economy just look at the EU right now. I have heard plenty about how citizens in France abuse the entitlement system from my cousin, who is French. I can only imagine the abuses that go on across the board. I know that they do pay more in taxes than we do, but for the most part, they are reaching their credit card limits as well.

[Dr_Snooz]

That's not quite the same thing. When you work for the government (this includes military service) you are trading your labor for money, just the same as any other occupation. Your employer just happens to be the government. An entitlement implies a right to something without any payment for said thing.

In fact I would almost expect government workers to be more angry about the idea of entitlement than non-government workers, because government workers have to work for their pay, instead of simply getting something for free.

As also stated by others, I think the word "entitlement" probably is overused/misused, leading to more confusion. So lets throw down the gauntlet and prove we can have a civilized discussion.

What do you (anyone) consider an entitlement and why do you believe it is such?


C|

I think if we're going to throw labels around and point the moral finger, then we should stand ready to have that finger pointed back at us. We're all a part of the problem and we're all in this together. The military is well-known for its waste, as well as for wars of aggression, torture, war crimes and soldiers who return with PTSDs, TBIs, mental problems and joblessness. Compared to that, "entitlement" dollars spent on food and shelter look pretty good to me.

As for entitlement "mentality," the worst I ever saw circulated among the Wall Street brokers with whom I worked. They made millions of dollars a year but thought the world owed them millions more. If we want to have a constructive discussion, we need to talk about the guys at the top who steal trillions instead of the folks at the bottom who steal much less.

[DBMaster]

Yes, as Tuttle said in "Brazil," "We're all in it together." My earlier comment about people not thinking about the common good is one that I stand by. No one seems to give a crap about anything beyond the confines of their own front doors. I realize that the world has become rather hard to keep tabs on, but if everyone just expended a little effort to realize how the things they do affect others I'll bet the world would become a lot more livable.

Snooz, think hard, since this country's official beginning in 1776 how many years have we NOT been in involved in a war with somebody? It boggles my mind. I mean absolutely no disrespect for our active military or veterans, of course, but what else could we have done with all that money and talent (the people who died)?

Also, the GOP loves to toss around numbers these days, such as how much "Obama has increased the national debt." I guess they forgot that at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan our country was spending pretty much $1 billion per day. In fact, assuming Obama is reelected and follows through on getting us out of Afghanistan, he could go down as a president that cut federal spending on an epic scale.

Of course, it's money well spent, right? Iraq is now a peaceful productive country, right? Afghanistan will never be a threat to anyone again after we leave, right? What a waste!

[ecogabriel]

At 17, a new recruit. Reagan to me was a great guy. He gave the military an 11% pay raise across the board which allowed alot of guys (my dad) to stop working second jobs in addition to their military duties to support their families. He brought out a plan that both broke the back of the USSR, put americans back to work with the 600 ship Navy we pulled every ship that was sitting in dry dock to be refitted and put back into service. Dropped capital gains tax down from 70% which pumped money into the economy.

And the most important in my opinion the main factor that the hostages were released from the Irainians.

Now he had his flaws but don't we all. Who is perfect?

He also enjoyed the era of the invention of the personal computer which launch an economic boom in the electronic age.


You put it very nicely how government stimulus policies work; in a recession, government spends in public works -retrofitting WWII era battleships and putting more money in the pockets of those more likely to spend it.

Such policies however come with increased deficits and debt, but apparently in modern politics those are only good policies when WE (and not THEM) make them.

The soviets were bankrupt from at least the 1960s; they had to import food because their agriculture was broken, and shortages of consumer goods were visible even in Moscow. They could not even spend enough to get into the moon race even though they were the first in space.

[ecogabriel]

The military is well-known for its waste, as well as for wars of aggression, torture, war crimes and soldiers who return with PTSDs, TBIs, mental problems and joblessness. Compared to that, "entitlement" dollars spent on food and shelter look pretty good to me.

As for entitlement "mentality," the worst I ever saw circulated among the Wall Street brokers with whom I worked.

Most of the military evils you mention come from the upper levels of the military and especially from the political side -Congress + lobbyists.

The wall street mob has costed us much much more than any "entitlement"; not only they have ruined the economy but also turned the political system into a plutocracy where if you do not get corporate money to run on you basically cannot be a candidate to anything.


My earlier comment about people not thinking about the common good is one that I stand by. No one seems to give a crap about anything beyond the confines of their own front doors

Also, the GOP loves to toss around numbers these days, such as how much "Obama has increased the national debt." I guess they forgot that at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan our country was spending pretty much $1 billion per day. In fact, assuming Obama is reelected and follows through on getting us out of Afghanistan, he could go down as a president that cut federal spending on an epic scale.!

It is OK to have different ideas about what is the "common good"; elections are made to decide on that. But ultra-super-partisanship blinds people even from the obvious facts; the cost of the wars was NEVER part of the government budget during the Bush Jr. years instead appropriated outside of the budget cycle.
Don't come back and claim fiscal discipline after that!

[2oodoor]

I
I blame much of this on sensationalist media. It's easier and cheaper to fill the time with over-dramatized simplistic issues than it is to present well thought out material and honest discussion. And people respond more readily to emotional content than they do to intellectual content

C|

Ok , I avoided the conversation a few days and whoa.. catching up, I wanted to comment here and there but this ^^^^^ is the only statement I wish to concur or Accord with if you will.
The emotional triggers here are overwhelming, and the intellectual methods of response delivery are commendable. You guys are great for remaining civil because that makes it an enjoyable read.

That said, you can detect the same afore mentioned media tactics in opinions expressed and in all fairness this is human nature. We have fact mixed with predicted and percieved outcome, which alone is the root of sensationalism.

These are indeed interesting times.

Entitlement? As you seek the redefining, please don't confuse select government worker benefits packages with welfare or ss benefits for those who make inferior choices, career or otherwise.
You also can't compare, for example, GM retirees loss of union agreed benefits, with military retirees loss of VA medical benefits. or can you? :eek5:

PTSD, please.. can you really not attach this to say, anybody you friggen know that has experienced life crisis? which I bet you can find in 95 percent of people you (anybody) know? I know it's real, shit Ive had it since childhood if you really want to match up dsm criteria. I get it over and over again but I cope with it. Only the strong survive, bunch of pussys....don't ask me to cover for your procreator's bad choices or any circumstances resulting there of. People are so busy blaming they get so used to complaining.. omg im going to write a song. Old guy nobody know wtf he's talking about, signing out.

[2oodoor]

Most of the military evils you mention come from the upper levels of the military and especially from the political side -Congress + lobbyists.

The wall street mob has costed us much much more than any "entitlement"; not only they have ruined the economy but also turned the political system into a plutocracy where if you do not get corporate money to run on you basically cannot be a candidate to anything.



It is OK to have different ideas about what is the "common good"; elections are made to decide on that. But ultra-super-partisanship blinds people even from the obvious facts; the cost of the wars was NEVER part of the government budget during the Bush Jr. years instead appropriated outside of the budget cycle.
Don't come back and claim fiscal discipline after that!

.. and that was awesome ecogabriel. Well stated.

[hammer3rd]

Obama wasnt set up to fail. He was set up to succeed. W done a DAMN good job with what the clinton adminastration handed him. Our GNP was up our job groth was up .25 to 1.5 points a quarter( AND THAT WAS SUBSTAINABLE GROWTH). All the jobe that are supposedly comeing back are all the chinese jobs that went there in the first place(REMBAR CLINTON ADMINASTRATION AND NAFTA). The chinese are rioting for more wages and shuting the factories down. And what about gun controll. If they take them from then they can controll us as they wish. And the main problem with this country is GREED. They are letting the super rich controll the country and not look out for the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Oh not to mention that this administration has spent more money THAN ALL OTHERS COMBINED. Just my 5 cents worth. No I am not a total GOP head. I do vote for the man with the best ideas. And I looked into obama befor he was elected and he scared me to the core. Even my wife ( a self proclaimed D didnt vote for him and said the same thing). Oh nad not to mention we have never had a Presadent bow to anyone else in the history of this conntry.

[Vanilla Sky]

I'm just saying this, but proofread, man. I can't understand anything that you just wrote. If you're going to participate in a debate, at least make your posts readable.

[nswst8]

I have alittle saying that I like, to explain how we have gotten to this point in our lives. "The majority of Americans are to stupid to realize how stupid they really are." The real power lies with them. Yet they let some damn think tank predict which way they will react to certain stimuli. Stupid fracking idiots!

But hey guys, great discussion.

[Vanilla Sky]

Phil, that's pretty spot on. I feel like I do a disservice when I only spend a few days prior to an election studying candidates. At that point, you know who the major players are, and there has been enough time for the dust to settle, so to say. I still think I spend far more time than 99% of the voting population doing research on the candidates.

One thing about predictions and numbers, especially when dealing with the population as a whole, is that they're usually spot on. For instance, they know which issues people feel strongly about, so when there is any advertising, media coverage, or the new favorite, town hall meetings, they know which buttons to push. Even this thread indicates that most of us feel strongly about the economy and government spending. If I made a thread with the title "Entitlement Programs for All!", I think many of you would respond very quickly and some may even attempt to make me, as the presenter of the information, look bad. If I made a thread with the title "End All Entitlement Programs!", I would expect a similar amount of responses, but they would be in favor of the thread topic.

Tailoring a campaign to a set of hot button issues will usually get someone elected. It's a shame that it's become a numbers game, and the guy that has the best statistician has a better chance at winning an election.

And before you say "Well, an election is technically a numbers game" or something of that nature, remember, manipulating the numbers is getting easier, and we're more than happy to freely share our feelings on things that matter. Some of us do it via forums or social networking sites, some of us answer polls. The data isn't taken violently, it's FREELY handed over to anyone who asks for it. Fifty years ago, data wasn't as easily available as it is now.

[2oodoor]

Good point ^^^


I'm just saying this, but proofread, man. I can't understand anything that you just wrote. If you're going to participate in a debate, at least make your posts readable.

I understood it fine. No need to intimidate anyone out of their freedom to participate just because their spellcheck is turned of.

Hammer3rd you forget how Bill bowed to Hillary? :naughty:

[hammer3rd]

I'm just saying this, but proofread, man. I can't understand anything that you just wrote. If you're going to participate in a debate, at least make your posts readable.

All I can say is read it again.

[hammer3rd]

Good point ^^^



I understood it fine. No need to intimidate anyone out of their freedom to participate just because their spellcheck is turned of.

Hammer3rd you forget how Bill bowed to Hillary? :naughty:

Thanks for the good word but I didnt forget that Bill was ran by her. She will more than likely be president some day.

[Vanilla Sky]

I did read it, but I did find it far more difficult to read than those facebook posts that intentionally misspell everything and at the end say something to the effect of "I bet you could still read this". It's bad for an argument, and posts like that usually get skipped over.

[DBMaster]

I have been finding it harder to compare one administration to the next objectively due to the very dissimilar circumstances faced by each. I knew a lot of people who, in 2001, were all over bashing Gore about 9/11. I am not sure what the point was, but I heard things like, "Aren't you glad it's Bush in the White House and not Gore?" It does make you wonder, a bit, about how each of our most recent presidents would have handled the situation. As I said, this makes it difficult FOR ME to determine what I really think of each administration.

Of course, the majority of us only hear news in passing and know very little about what happens in the rest of the U.S., much less the world at large. To borrow another phrase, the more I know the more I know I don't know.

[hammer3rd]

i have been finding it harder to compare one administration to the next objectively due to the very dissimilar circumstances faced by each. I knew a lot of people who, in 2001, were all over bashing gore about 9/11. I am not sure what the point was, but i heard things like, "aren't you glad it's bush in the white house and not gore?" it does make you wonder, a bit, about how each of our most recent presidents would have handled the situation. As i said, this makes it difficult for me to determine what i really think of each administration.

Of course, the majority of us only hear news in passing and know very little about what happens in the rest of the u.s., much less the world at large. To borrow another phrase, the more i know the more i know i don't know.

amen brother!!!!!!!!!!!

[hammer3rd]

I did read it, but I did find it far more difficult to read than those facebook posts that intentionally misspell everything and at the end say something to the effect of "I bet you could still read this". It's bad for an argument, and posts like that usually get skipped over.

Obama wasn’t set up to fail. He was set up to succeed. W done a DAMN good job with what the Clinton administration handed him. Our GNP was up our job growth was up .25 to 1.5 points a quarter (AND THAT WAS SUBSTAINABLE GROWTH). All the job that are supposedly coming back are all the Chinese jobs that went there in the first place (REMBAR CLINTON ADMINASTRATION AND NAFTA). The Chinese are rioting for more wages and shutting the factories down. And what about gun control. If they take them from then they can control us as they wish. And the main problem with this country is GREED. They are letting the super-rich control the country and not look out for the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Oh not to mention that this administration has spent more money THAN ALL OTHERS COMBINED. Just my 5 cents worth. No I am not a total GOP head. I do vote for the man with the best ideas. And I looked into Obama before he was elected and he scared me to the core. Even my wife (a self-proclaimed D didn’t vote for him and said the same thing). Oh and not to mention we have never had a President Bow to anyone else in the history of this country.



SEE IF THIS IS ANY BETTER. Leafe it to the pmoele who nit pic the sb and totrtyly leok ohrr wett is rjeudt in frjst of tmeh. Mabey this is better.

[hammer3rd]

Sorry guys just thought I would put in my two cents worth. Guess people get pic what they get upset by.

[Vanilla Sky]

I agree. You really can't directly compare one administration to another.

[cygnus x-1]

I have been finding it harder to compare one administration to the next objectively due to the very dissimilar circumstances faced by each.


SO very true. My feeling is that (most of the time) the president has far less impact on the world than we might like to think, and they always end up being mostly a product of their time. The Clinton administration would have been very different had there been no tech boom. GWB had the housing bubble and 911. Reagan had the end of the cold war. FDR had the great depression and WW2. Lincoln had the Civil war. So I sometimes wonder why people spend so much time comparing current administrations with past ones. Sure there is some value in looking at historical events but I think some some people just end up pining over the past. Not that any of us would ever do that, hanging out on a web forum dedicated to '80s automobiles. :Owned2: :D


Yeah. Anyway, so nobody was really brave enough to "point the moral finger" at their favorite entitlement program? Would we all at least agree that the definition of an entitlement is essentially "getting something for nothing"? If so then can anyone name a government program where you really do get something for nothing?


C|

[Dr_Snooz]

I will point the moral finger at TARP and all the other forms of bank bailouts that are ongoing and estimated by some to be between $14 trillion and $30 trillion so far. I'll point the moral finger at big corporations like GE, Exxon and BofA who pay no federal income tax, while our schools close, our roads crumble and our bridges collapse. I'll point the moral finger at weapons contractors who use political influence to keep profitable weapons programs going long beyond their useful lives and who send poorly tested, half-baked weapons to our boys in harm's way. I'll point the finger at oil companies who use the US military to steal the resources of other nations and who deep six every promising alternative fuel. I'll point the finger at big box retailers who extract tax breaks and subsidies from municipalities, destroy local businesses, expropriate local wealth, trap more people in minimum wage hell and counsel employees to use government social programs to bridge the gap between their reprehensible wages and the cost of living. I'll point the moral finger at a tax code that rewards businesses for moving jobs overseas. I'll point the finger at farm subsidies that pay farmers to grow food far in excess of market demand, that encourage them to douse our food with poisonous chemicals and that teach them to destroy the fertility of the soil. I'll point the moral finger at billionaires who do no useful work, who live off the money their money makes and dream up more creative ways to impoverish workers, privatize gains and socialize losses, yet have the temerity to believe it is their due to pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us. They should be picking tomatoes in the hot sun. These entitlements are truly odious and profoundly corrosive to the human condition. They impoverish us all and bring the country closer each day to an ugly reckoning.

[ecogabriel]

I find it disconcerting that people talk about "entitlement" but forget to talk about CORPORATE WELFARE.

The tax code is riddled with TAX EXPENDITURES, which is a fancy term to describe a tax exemption/deduction that someone may take in exchange for doing something else; the tax deduction on health care benefits provided by employers is one visible example, though there may be hundreds of others that are more expensive and hidden from plain view - unless one can afford GE's tax department.

Continuing with the crooks of finance, I hope Snooz has not read about JPMorgan's increasing losses with its derivatives bets
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/us-jpmorgan-loss-size-idUSBRE85R1EU20120628

Or how Barclays Bank was fixing one core rate in financial markets - the LIBOR rate.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/barclays-libor-idUSL6E8HRA5320120628
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/barclays-libor-emails-idUSL6E8HRFL020120627?envprodusx=0

Personally, I find deeply problematic the discussion about entitlements because there is hardly ANY mention on the TRILLIONS spent or wasted on corporate welfare. Close to home: all of us living in GA that have Georgia Power as supplier of electricity are financing the construction of two nuclear reactors near Augusta - reactors that GP would eventually operate to generate profits for themselves (not us consumers)
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/vogtle-venture-costs-public-1378072.html

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/02/14/a-federal-energy-subsidy-15-times-bigger-than-solyndra/

My take on the "entitlements" thing is that most of the arguments are a distraction to entertain us with something while the corporate welfare bleed us dry via our government already in the corporate pockets.
If you ask a psychologist, he would tell you that corporate welfare recipients engage in projection bias: they deny their character of entitlement-beggars by pointing out their fingers to others who they claim are entitlement-beggars.
Bottom line: talk about entitlement all you want, but be COMPREHENSIVE; also grab a calculator (a spreadsheet actually) to run the numbers where WE are losing the most $$$.

EDIT: sorry, but another financial crook. ING channeled money to Iran and Cuba despite of embargo.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/12/ing-sanctions-idUSL1E8HC5Q420120612

Is it me, or the collection of CRIMINALS from the financial industry has no end???

And a VERY old list of CORPORATE FRAUD scandals by Forbes.com
http://www.forbes.com/2002/07/25/accountingtracker.html
Too bad they stopped updating it in 2002; I suspect they would have run out of server space had they continued adding data.

[ecogabriel]

Is the provision of social security "entitlement"? Friedrich Von Hayek apparently did not think so,

There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision

You can google the entire phrase (I took it from Wikipedia) and it would take you to google books, where Road to Serfdom and this paragraph can be found in page 148.

This comes from what is consider a pro-market, pro-freedom god for conservatives. Go figure.

[nswst8]

The former and current a**hole in office is the one who bailed out the corporate a**holes and stiffled the cleanup process. WE would not be where we are now had corporate been forced to deal with the mess they created.

Lets bail out the very same a**holes and leave them in place to do it again. These guys would have been jumping from the highrise corporate office suites they occupy. Had they not been bailed out.

Anyone see the latest on Stockton, CA. Guess who will be getting no bailout? Stockton is the first of many to follow.

[hammer3rd]

Is the provision of social security "entitlement"? Friedrich Von Hayek apparently did not think so,

There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision

You can google the entire phrase (I took it from Wikipedia) and it would take you to google books, where Road to Serfdom and this paragraph can be found in page 148.

This comes from what is consider a pro-market, pro-freedom god for conservatives. Go figure.

I have a problem with the term entitlement all together. Like SS for example. Why do people get it who have never paid a dime into it. I have been laid off 6 times since i went to work in the maintenance field in 1996. All going over seas or bigger compaines buying smaller ones and closeing them. I have tried to get money for school 4 of thoes times and was told every time that I made too much money the year I had to use for my tax returnes. But I went back this time and am paying myself and I run across loads of people young and old that haver never worked at all and get the full $5550.00 pale grant and some even get a $2200.00 on top of that. I have worked in th USA for thirty years and never failed to pay the huge taxes that come out of my check every week. My point is not entitlement but dues that we should get from time to time. If I made $60000.00 dollars in a year and paid $22000.00 in taxes why the hell cant I get some of it back to better my self so I can get another $60000.00 paying job and keep contributing to the country. AND NOT BE A FREELOADER LIKE I HAVE COME IN CONTACT WITH IN COLLAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gfrg88]

https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRmbUVGaSJi-FAW9cvKQ0mhlCtkA3k3zD70oUoWHfvoADeEEyMo

[cygnus x-1]

I have a problem with the term entitlement all together. Like SS for example. Why do people get it who have never paid a dime into it.

Like who?





I have been laid off 6 times since i went to work in the maintenance field in 1996. All going over seas or bigger compaines buying smaller ones and closeing them. I have tried to get money for school 4 of thoes times and was told every time that I made too much money the year I had to use for my tax returnes. But I went back this time and am paying myself and I run across loads of people young and old that haver never worked at all and get the full $5550.00 pale grant and some even get a $2200.00 on top of that.


Because the Pell grant is a needs based grant. So the more money you make, the less you supposedly need the assistance. In your case you did find a way to pay your own way, which those others that haven't worked as much would not have been able to do. So in that way the system worked as intended.

Note however, that *needing* assistance is not the same thing as *deserving* assistance. And this is where the idea of entitlement comes in.




My point is not entitlement but dues that we should get from time to time. If I made $60000.00 dollars in a year and paid $22000.00 in taxes why the hell cant I get some of it back to better my self so I can get another $60000.00 paying job and keep contributing to the country. AND NOT BE A FREELOADER LIKE I HAVE COME IN CONTACT WITH IN COLLAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Exactly. Needs vs. deserves. How do you distinguish between the two? Which one is more important? These are hard questions and I certainly don't have the answers.


C|

[hammer3rd]

Like who?







Because the Pell grant is a needs based grant. So the more money you make, the less you supposedly need the assistance. In your case you did find a way to pay your own way, which those others that haven't worked as much would not have been able to do. So in that way the system worked as intended.

Note however, that *needing* assistance is not the same thing as *deserving* assistance. And this is where the idea of entitlement comes in.






Exactly. Needs vs. deserves. How do you distinguish between the two? Which one is more important? These are hard questions and I certainly don't have the answers.


C|

Social Security. One should not get any if they have not paid any in.
And I feel the same about anyother government program. That way we dont see a big deficit in things going out like we have now. Lile the pell grant. Why if you have not contributed in any way should you get anything?

[DBMaster]

I wonder how much college would cost if there were no such thing as government backed student loans, Pell grants, or scholarships. My guess is a lot less. How many times have I heard our officials stating how the U.S. needs to make education affordable if we are to keep up with the rest of the world and retain our comparative leadership position? Yet college costs rise at a faster pace than general inflation, graduates are saddled with immense debt that prevents many from becoming independent adults, and jobs for new graduates are not absorbing these graduates as they once did.

Perhaps the answer is that too many people are going to college. We've all been told since childhood - at least people my age have - that we MUST go to college to be able to afford the lifestyles our parents provided for us. The number that's been thrown around for years is that a college graduate earns, on average, a million dollars more in a lifetime than someone with only a high school diploma.

I don't know what the answer is. What do you all think?

[hammer3rd]

I wonder how much college would cost if there were no such thing as government backed student loans, Pell grants, or scholarships. My guess is a lot less. How many times have I heard our officials stating how the U.S. needs to make education affordable if we are to keep up with the rest of the world and retain our comparative leadership position? Yet college costs rise at a faster pace than general inflation, graduates are saddled with immense debt that prevents many from becoming independent adults, and jobs for new graduates are not absorbing these graduates as they once did.

Perhaps the answer is that too many people are going to college. We've all been told since childhood - at least people my age have - that we MUST go to college to be able to afford the lifestyles our parents provided for us. The number that's been thrown around for years is that a college graduate earns, on average, a million dollars more in a lifetime than someone with only a high school diploma.

I don't know what the answer is. What do you all think?

I agree completely. But I still stand by the comment that if a person has paid thier dues ie taxes and many mears of work then government help would not cost as much. Why because if you havent paid your dues then you should not get government help. And collage is way to high these days. I took 8 credit hours this semester and it cost me 850.00 with books. Thats two classes. So being cheaper would help alot also.

[DBMaster]

When I was a college student in 1983 Texas had the cheapest in-state tuition in the U.S. A fifteen credit hour semester cost under $300 in tuition and fees. Now, for my daughter, it costs about $8,000-9,000. She does get a bit of scholarship and grant money which leaves me out of pocket about $5,000 per semester. (That does include room & board, though). I think the tuition and fees portion is about $4,500 or so. Big difference in thirty years.

I wonder what would happen if only the people whose parents could pay for college outright got to attend college. I am NOT advocating that, just wondering.

[Vanilla Sky]

We'd lose the middle class and any upward mobility we have left.

[DBMaster]

You mean, we haven't already? I myself have proven that a middle class college graduate can certainly be DOWNWARDLY mobile!

College was so cheap for me loans were not needed, but if a new graduate comes out of school with no job owing as much as if they had bought a small house how much upward mobility does that offer?

[hammer3rd]

We'd lose the middle class and any upward mobility we have left.

We dont have upward mobility any left anyway( as if we ever had any ). You are a product of your environment. What I am trying to say is that you stay where you are at birth( meaning class of living ). It is a proven fact that only about 11% of people actually rise above where they were bourn at. And about 5% of those have some sort of help( from the upper 1% ). So much for the so called American dream.

Now dont get me wrong. I dont have a problem with anyone or what they make. But the rich keep getting richer and the middle and lower class keep going lower. I feel because of shear greed. If one has all that money why take more away from someone that has much less. Sorry to rant but how I feel.

[DBMaster]

We are simply fighting tooth and nail to maintain status quo and losing.

Probably, the best thing for all of us to do is modify our world view to coincide with reality so we can at least have a shot at being content. The vast majority of us still have a better and more comfortable life than the vast majority of humans that have ever lived.

This thread is turning far less political than philosophical. It's fun.

[ecogabriel]

When I was a college student in 1983 Texas had the cheapest in-state tuition in the U.S. A fifteen credit hour semester cost under $300 in tuition and fees. Now, for my daughter, it costs about $8,000-9,000. She does get a bit of scholarship and grant money which leaves me out of pocket about $5,000 per semester. (That does include room & board, though). I think the tuition and fees portion is about $4,500 or so. Big difference in thirty years.

I wonder what would happen if only the people whose parents could pay for college outright got to attend college. I am NOT advocating that, just wondering.

The other side of the story is HOW MUCH LESS states are contributing to the funding of universities compared to three decades ago; nowadays may well be into the single digits, and aiming even lower. If this continues, eventually only the well-off would get a college education regardless of merit, like in the old, old days.

[DBMaster]

Gabriel, that is an extremely good point, especially here in Texas. Back in the 80's, certain Texas universities benefited from the "Permanent University Fund" (PUF). I think I recall a stat like two thirds of college expenses for Texas residents were covered by the state. Nowadays, it's a far cry from that. Texas has been consistently cutting funding for years even from primary and secondary education. We are loath to add taxes, you see. My prediction is that twenty years from now people will be fleeing Texas rather than flocking to it. The "business friendly" environment will become our undoing and turn us into a third-world country. Of course, I think "Dick" Perry has already turned us into the butt of many jokes.

[cygnus x-1]

Social Security. One should not get any if they have not paid any in.

Right. But my question was who is collecting social security without paying into it?





Perhaps the answer is that too many people are going to college. We've all been told since childhood - at least people my age have - that we MUST go to college to be able to afford the lifestyles our parents provided for us.

I think there are a couple things wrong here. It's not so much that too many kids are going to college, it's that too many kids are going to college for 4 year degrees that either they don't really have the aptitude for, or that won't help them get a job later. Why? Because like you said, their guidance counselors told them they needed a 4 year degree to not be a failure in life. But there are plenty of jobs out there that only require a 2 year degree or even just a basic certification program. There is nothing wrong with working in one of the various trades, and many people are quite successful doing so.

The other problem is that grade school and high school education totally sucks now (for the most part). Thanks to standardized testing schools are now only teaching kids how to score well on standardized tests so that the school keeps getting their funding from the state. No longer are they concerned with teaching real skills that will help kids be productive members of society. So now every kid has to go to college to make up for what (s)he didn't learn in high school.




I agree completely. But I still stand by the comment that if a person has paid thier dues ie taxes and many mears of work then government help would not cost as much. Why because if you havent paid your dues then you should not get government help. And collage is way to high these days. I took 8 credit hours this semester and it cost me 850.00 with books. Thats two classes. So being cheaper would help alot also.

That doesn't really seem that bad if you think of it in terms of how much it will help you later on. What is the return on investment? If you spend X dollars now to get a higher paying job, how long will it take to get back your X dollar investment?

No doubt college is expensive, but what is the alternative?




We dont have upward mobility any left anyway( as if we ever had any ). You are a product of your environment. What I am trying to say is that you stay where you are at birth( meaning class of living ). It is a proven fact that only about 11% of people actually rise above where they were bourn at. And about 5% of those have some sort of help( from the upper 1% ). So much for the so called American dream.

I've never heard those numbers. Where did they come from?




Now dont get me wrong. I dont have a problem with anyone or what they make. But the rich keep getting richer and the middle and lower class keep going lower. I feel because of shear greed. If one has all that money why take more away from someone that has much less. Sorry to rant but how I feel.

There was a book I heard about (watching Bill Moyers) that goes into detail about the rich/poor divide. The claim was that it's not even the rich that are getting richer, but the super-rich that are getting richer. Not even the top 1%, but the top 1% of that 1%. The conclusion was that this is happening because the federal government has been writing legislation over the past 40 years to disproportionately help the super-rich. I wish I could remember the name of it now, it sounded really interesting.




We are simply fighting tooth and nail to maintain status quo and losing.

Part of this is due to the economic downturn. To some extent we have been spoiled by a fairly long period of prosperity.




Probably, the best thing for all of us to do is modify our world view to coincide with reality so we can at least have a shot at being content. The vast majority of us still have a better and more comfortable life than the vast majority of humans that have ever lived.

This is very true. Overall I would have to say the average standard of living has gone up considerably in the last few hundred years.




This thread is turning far less political than philosophical. It's fun.

Philosphy is more interesting than politics. Politics is barely more than an intellectual fist fight.


C|

[hammer3rd]

My grandmother had health problems and waited two years to go for SS. When she got there, there was a lady there that was the same age but had never worked in the US, got withen 20 dollars of what my grandmother got who had worked and paid taxes for over 45 years.

I am going th a community collage and it is not very high compared to a major university. But I cant keep going and paying without working.

As far as thoes numbers, They came from cnn. There was a guest on there one evening and he was talking about the (so called American dream) and that if you are bourn into a certin class that because of the way is setup that you are stuck there. Only a few rise above where they are.

THe super rich is what is running the country and they are getting super richer every day. You hear about the richest man in the world like Bill Gates, That is a drop in the bucket to what the super rich have. Money that starts in the 100's of trilion's of dollars. Thats the super rich and they want mine and yours.

Sorry I dont know how to milti quote.

[hammer3rd]

I will say this also. And this is not a stab at obama or Demacrats. But if you like your freedom you need to stop obama from getting realected. Gun control doesnt work everyone with a brain who dont just follow the local news knows this. But yet they keep pushing it. So do your math. Without a way to defend ourselfs what do you think that they are going to do to us then. Not just a thought but have done my home work on guncontroll and other countrys that have taken all there citizens guns away and it is scary what has happend. JUST A THOUGHT FROM A CONCERNED CITIZEN!!!!!!

[Vanilla Sky]

Please stop simply repeating rhetoric from your party. It is, in my opinion, one of the major reasons Americans are the laughing stock of the world. Most are so blindly lead on by a party full of people that have more money than god that the people that know what's going on are mooted by the people that vote along party lines.

College educations have gotten more expensive because they aren't subsidized as heavily as they once were. Most people don't like to pay taxes, but don't understand that taxes are how they got their education, and thus their jobs and their income level. I've heard a lot of people spout off about how they don't want to pay for education, but went to public schools and went to college on grants.

The government has grant programs for education because it offers a good return on investment. Having to pay in first would mean that no one that needs assistance gets it, only people that have had an opportunity to gain what they seek and then squandered it away themselves. Now that sounds like welfare to me, doesn't it? That would only truly serve to maintain the status quo for people that aren't good with money. If you give a grant to someone that can't afford school but in ten years is making $250,000 a year instead of $25,000 a year, they will pay back in taxes more than what the grant cost to begin with. Seeking to only give money to people that have paid into the system is incredibly short sighted, and rather irresponsible. I'm not saying we should be handing money out like it's free, but what you may consider welfare is the government investing in the future.

One thing to consider is that putting 2 people on welfare doesn't cover the cost of putting one inmate in jail. It's cheaper to give people welfare than to arrest, convict, and jail inmates.

[Dr_Snooz]

I think what makes political discussions so difficult is that so many Americans have such wildly false ideas about things. I talk to people every day who genuinely believe that Obama is a socialist, that welfare is bankrupting the country and that chasing all the Mexicans back to Mexico will improve our standard of living. All of it is complete nonsense, propounded by a media that is owned by the same billionaires who are raping the country.

It really doesn't matter if you are left or right. If you think the sky is orange and things fall up, you'll have a really hard time fixing things. The first thing we all have to do is get educated about what is really going on. So, I recommend that you stop getting your news from the mainstream media. That includes Fox News, CNN, NY Times, MSNBC. All of them.

If you are a liberal, I recommend Truthdig.com, Truthout.org and AlterNet.org highly.

If you are conservative, I recommend Alex Jones (infowars.tv). He's nuts, but he knows what's up.

Other outstanding sources include: ProjectCensored.org, WebOfDebt.wordpress.com and GlobalResearch.ca.

There are many more, but these will get you started. Nose around and learn what's really happening. We can't come to any real solutions if we have bad info. Get educated and get powerful.

[hammer3rd]

Please stop simply repeating rhetoric from your party. It is, in my opinion, one of the major reasons Americans are the laughing stock of the world. Most are so blindly lead on by a party full of people that have more money than god that the people that know what's going on are mooted by the people that vote along party lines.

College educations have gotten more expensive because they aren't subsidized as heavily as they once were. Most people don't like to pay taxes, but don't understand that taxes are how they got their education, and thus their jobs and their income level. I've heard a lot of people spout off about how they don't want to pay for education, but went to public schools and went to college on grants.

The government has grant programs for education because it offers a good return on investment. Having to pay in first would mean that no one that needs assistance gets it, only people that have had an opportunity to gain what they seek and then squandered it away themselves. Now that sounds like welfare to me, doesn't it? That would only truly serve to maintain the status quo for people that aren't good with money. If you give a grant to someone that can't afford school but in ten years is making $250,000 a year instead of $25,000 a year, they will pay back in taxes more than what the grant cost to begin with. Seeking to only give money to people that have paid into the system is incredibly short sighted, and rather irresponsible. I'm not saying we should be handing money out like it's free, but what you may consider welfare is the government investing in the future.

One thing to consider is that putting 2 people on welfare doesn't cover the cost of putting one inmate in jail. It's cheaper to give people welfare than to arrest, convict, and jail inmates.

Thoughts like this is exactly why the system is up side down in the first place.

Most people dont mind paying taxes but at 75%to78% of a persons paycheck is already going to taxes, where does it stop. We are going through the same thing that caused us to leave Brittan in the first place. Taxsation with out repersatation.

And no I dont think that only people who have paid in should get something, But more poeple not paying in are getting help now than thoes that are paying in.

And what does this mean?(Please stop simply repeating rhetoric from your party. It is, in my opinion, one of the major reasons Americans are the laughing stock of the world. Most are so blindly lead on by a party full of people that have more money than god that the people that know what's going on are mooted by the people that vote along party lines.) Just courious!!!!!!!!

[Vanilla Sky]

Well, you tend to simply spout off rhetoric as fact with nothing close to a citation. It's why our political system is failing, and why our country is failing. I'm not suggesting that we go back to only land owners having the right to vote, which meant only white men that had money could vote. What I am saying is that we need to work to be truthful and honest, not spout off what the parties tell us is bad about the other parties.

And what 75% goes to taxes? Either you failed at math or you're making a lot of money. Remember, our nation was most prosperous when the top taxation rate was 90%(1) or above. Of course, we had wars going on at the time. This time when we went to war, we simply borrowed the money in order to do so.

With that said, if you're going to use numbers to back up a claim, please cite them.

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rat es

[nswst8]

Obama/Hillary crew trying to slip in a back door gun control measure through the United Nations banning small arms sales treaty, this is to include the United States.

I say F**k No! They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.

"Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'donnel' "FAT"

[hammer3rd]

Join the NRA and vote acordingly is all I have to say.

[hammer3rd]

Well, you tend to simply spout off rhetoric as fact with nothing close to a citation. It's why our political system is failing, and why our country is failing. I'm not suggesting that we go back to only land owners having the right to vote, which meant only white men that had money could vote. What I am saying is that we need to work to be truthful and honest, not spout off what the parties tell us is bad about the other parties.

And what 75% goes to taxes? Either you failed at math or you're making a lot of money. Remember, our nation was most prosperous when the top taxation rate was 90%(1) or above. Of course, we had wars going on at the time. This time when we went to war, we simply borrowed the money in order to do so.

With that said, if you're going to use numbers to back up a claim, please cite them.

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rat es

Hey dude this is bs. I have my opinion and you have yours. No need to get hostile.

I did a paper for collage about taxes(not only income taxes but all others). And came up with all the %'s. Not going to argue with you. But if you make more than 50000.00 dollars you already know that you are in the top tax braket of 33%. not including all the special stuff uncle sam gets. Combine that with taxes on all other things you buy to live and enjoy there is where the 75%to78% comes from.

I rember one thing from the paper that stands out. Take a loaf of bread. Tell me how many taxes there are on it.

And I dount spout rhetoric. Like I said please say how it goes with this comversation. And If you are talking about gun comtrol that is not your so called (rhetoric). But fact and has been going on for a very long time. Statred with Lyndon B Johnson in 1968. Well not really but the 30's I belive with the ban on full autos in the publics hands. But has been going on sence LBJ.

Your turn my friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

[hammer3rd]

The answer to the loaf of bread question is 151 taxes. This is part of what I meant by 75%. Sound familier to the reason we left Brittian.

http://www.whatsbestnext.com/2009/04/151-taxes-in-a-loaf-of-bread/

This is what I was tallking about when I said 75%. And I did fail at math but I can add to 100%. lol just a joke.

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIH6SflPnxAAGT77w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrc3 VyamVwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQD?p=forrest+gump+ thats+all+ive+got+to+say+bout+that&vid=D78F5FC73BFA09F3B01ED78F5FC73BFA09F3B01E&l=00%3A05&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fvideos%2Fthumb nail.aspx%3Fq%3D4924618715431044%26id%3De2389a2174 fa3c3a56037c6ebf3bb883%26bid%3DHrDzCfo7x1%252bP1w% 26bn%3DLargeThumb%26url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.y outube.com%252fwatch%253fv%253dOtm4RusESNU&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOt m4RusESNU&tit=That%26%2339%3Bs+All+I+Have+To+Say+About+That-+Forrest+Gump+Quote&c=0&sigr=11a747qve&

[2oodoor]

I think what makes political discussions so difficult is that so many Americans have such wildly false ideas about things. .

X2

SNOOZ A&M ftw

Was SS designed for individuals or for the good of the many?

As far as a bottom line figure, I pay in more in county/local taxes annually than any other.
There does seem to be a black hole a lot of money accumulates, in all levels of govt.. there are delayed publishings of surplus, and yet there is never enough, post fiscally, from what we are told.

Rosie Odonnel? what happened to that woman, I always admired her back in the Carolyns comedy club. She always emits such bitterness anymore.

Gun control? please, shut the barn door after the hoss got out. I think there is sufficient GC now. Unless you make them electronic so you have to subcribe to them, I don't imagine legislation alone would work.
More and more guns are being sold now thanks to the zombie apocolypse mania. Hopefully most people don't truely believe in this but it makes for an awesome hobby and excuse to go to the range.

Hammer3rd, I am glad you have a good sense of humor thorough this conversation. Kudos

[2drSE-i]

I just think it's funny you "Hate entitlement" and then say you "deserve help with collage (college, by the way)" I'm not saying its right that there are people who have never worked that get free college, but that's the nature of the beast.

Phil, Congress has to approve all treaties if I remember correctly from highschool government. Also, no agreement on the international level can over-ride our Constitution.

[2drSE-i]

Gun control? please, shut the barn door after the hoss got out. I think there is sufficient GC now. Unless you make them electronic so you have to subcribe to them, I don't imagine legislation alone would work.
More and more guns are being sold now thanks to the zombie apocolypse mania. Hopefully most people don't truely believe in this but it makes for an awesome hobby and excuse to go to the range.

I don't think it's zombie mania, I think people are finally getting educated. The sport has never been bigger than it is now. Especially in this election year, supply is falling WAY short of demand.

Gun control is just as stupid as New York banning the sale of large sodas. The only thing gun control does is make people easier victims.

"I believe in the 2nd Amendment because I believe crime should be a dangerous occupation"

[hammer3rd]

X2

SNOOZ A&M ftw

Was SS designed for individuals or for the good of the many?

As far as a bottom line figure, I pay in more in county/local taxes annually than any other.
There does seem to be a black hole a lot of money accumulates, in all levels of govt.. there are delayed publishings of surplus, and yet there is never enough, post fiscally, from what we are told.

Rosie Odonnel? what happened to that woman, I always admired her back in the Carolyns comedy club. She always emits such bitterness anymore.

Gun control? please, shut the barn door after the hoss got out. I think there is sufficient GC now. Unless you make them electronic so you have to subcribe to them, I don't imagine legislation alone would work.
More and more guns are being sold now thanks to the zombie apocolypse mania. Hopefully most people don't truely believe in this but it makes for an awesome hobby and excuse to go to the range.

Hammer3rd, I am glad you have a good sense of humor thorough this conversation. Kudos

Thanks for the good word. But gun control is not about makeing the US a safer place, It is about the total control of the people.

[hammer3rd]

I just think it's funny you "Hate entitlement" and then say you "deserve help with collage (college, by the way)" I'm not saying its right that there are people who have never worked that get free college, but that's the nature of the beast.

Phil, Congress has to approve all treaties if I remember correctly from highschool government. Also, no agreement on the international level can over-ride our Constitution.

Sorry. I say that I hate entitlement on the premis that some people have never worked or have worked very little and seem to have everything they need and a damn lot that they want.

That is what I see as entitlement, Again very sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes I feel I deserve help (notice I said help)(not paid for) to go back to school. As I said before, why do the ones that work and pay lots of taxes never seem to be the ones to get help when they really need it.

[DBMaster]

"More money than God"

Can anyone tell me what God's annual salary is? Does He receive a bonus for laying off peons?

Just trying to lighten things up a bit. Political discussions very often seem to become hostile. Let's all play nice. There are rarely any absolutes where human relationships are involved.

[hammer3rd]

"More money than God"

Can anyone tell me what God's annual salary is? Does He receive a bonus for laying off peons?

Just trying to lighten things up a bit. Political discussions very often seem to become hostile. Let's all play nice. There are rarely any absolutes where human relationships are involved.

Amen Brother.

[Vanilla Sky]

I dunno, I think we can look into how much churches and religious organizations bring in, add it up and come up with how much money each god makes each year. Then again, the major religions in the US are all tie back to the same god.

Personally, I think every American deserves help during a tough time. Whether it be to go to college or to help them between jobs, I feel that everyone, no matter if they paid in anything or not, should have the same opportunity. I also don't believe they should discriminate, which they clearly do. If you've ever been in a situation that you needed the assistance of a program such as food stamps, you'll see that a white family has a more difficult time receiving help than a minority family. It's like they apply affirmative action to government programs as well.

As for guns, there will always be a black market for anything illegal. Guns won't go away because they make them illegal. They might become a little harder to find, but they certainly won't become any harder to find than drugs or a prostitute.

[2drSE-i]

Sorry. I say that I hate entitlement on the premis that some people have never worked or have worked very little and seem to have everything they need and a damn lot that they want.

That is what I see as entitlement, Again very sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes I feel I deserve help (notice I said help)(not paid for) to go back to school. As I said before, why do the ones that work and pay lots of taxes never seem to be the ones to get help when they really need it.
Don't worry, I totally agree with you on the entitlement thing. However, if you make enough (arguably) to pay for college, do so. There is no reason in the world these dumb-ass college kids should wine and cry about their crushing student loan debt when they took cost-of-living loans and partied for 4 years rathen than working. I understand, college is HARD, but if you don't have a job, you're not trying.

I dunno, I think we can look into how much churches and religious organizations bring in, add it up and come up with how much money each god makes each year. Then again, the major religions in the US are all tie back to the same god.

Personally, I think every American deserves help during a tough time. Whether it be to go to college or to help them between jobs, I feel that everyone, no matter if they paid in anything or not, should have the same opportunity. I also don't believe they should discriminate, which they clearly do. If you've ever been in a situation that you needed the assistance of a program such as food stamps, you'll see that a white family has a more difficult time receiving help than a minority family. It's like they apply affirmative action to government programs as well.

As for guns, there will always be a black market for anything illegal. Guns won't go away because they make them illegal. They might become a little harder to find, but they certainly won't become any harder to find than drugs or a prostitute.

1. I think EVERY company should pay taxes. The fact that churches get a break because they are religious instutions is a joke. If they actually make an effort and are legitimitely non-profit and charitable, then sure. But these TV churches are a joke.

2. I'm all for a hand-up, but the amount of hand-outs is deplorable. I cannot speak for the race issue, i've never noticed.

3. Agreed. It will just turn a TON of people into criminals. Look at Washington D.C. with their handgun ban. More violent gun-crime than any other area per capita.

(Please forgive typos. I rely heavily on spell-check, and my work computer doesn't have it...)

[nswst8]

Schwarzenegger immigrated in the early 60s, earned a degree in economics started a construction company and invested in real estate all while competing in professional bodybuilding.

Through all of this he formed his opinion of what was wrong with the majority of Americans failing to thrive in this country. "Americans fail to take advantage of all the opportunities available to them"

I for one agree with this opinion. Most Americans expect something for nothing just because they are Americans. This is bad thinking.

As for guns, yes they will always be available this is a certain. Why should we let them take the 2nd amendment away from us just when it was clarified by SCOTUS.

As for goverment welfare programs I don't see it as more difficult for whitey to get it than minorities. It is based on means, not race. I see just as many whites qualifing for welfare as anyone else.

[Vanilla Sky]

Some people take classes that basically prevent them from working. Some schools suggest that you don't work. One of these schools is Full Sail in Orlando. Their schedule is 24 hours, so you might have a class at 3AM and another at noon. Then there are majors that require so much lab time that you don't have time to work. I fully understand not working while going to school. I know I couldn't do it. Then again, I'm not looking at cost of living loans, either.

As for my black market guns comment, I wasn't really talking about the "criminals" being able to find guns. I was saying that you'd be able to get guns as easily as calling your dealer or pimp.

[hammer3rd]

Some people take classes that basically prevent them from working. Some schools suggest that you don't work. One of these schools is Full Sail in Orlando. Their schedule is 24 hours, so you might have a class at 3AM and another at noon. Then there are majors that require so much lab time that you don't have time to work. I fully understand not working while going to school. I know I couldn't do it. Then again, I'm not looking at cost of living loans, either.

As for my black market guns comment, I wasn't really talking about the "criminals" being able to find guns. I was saying that you'd be able to get guns as easily as calling your dealer or pimp.

Thats just it. The honest American people are not the actual problem. And takeing guns from law abiding citizens the most of them will not ever buy another gun(sheep in the corral syndrome). With that being said, now take a look at the (actual LOL) or so called reason for gun control. To make it safer for the people. But in every instance where gun laws took firearms from honest people the crime has risen. The CDC did a study about 7or8 years ago and came up with the number of around 250000.00 people ward off a would be attacker and never fire a shot. The national average is (which is sad but a fact none the less) is around 30000.00 homicides with a firearm per year, this includes legit shootings(cops people fighting off attackers etc). Then how in the hell can gun controll work. Take the cities with major laws and look at thye crime rates(enough said). Then the question left is what are they doing. We are the last democratic nation left and they want that to go away. Without guns they can controll us and finish what they have started and that is do away with the constitution. Look at the UK,Austrialia,Canada. They all lost thier right to keep and bear arms and look at them now.

[Vanilla Sky]

Actually, crime in Canada is very low. They can also keep and bear arms, but not hand guns. In the UK, they typically use knives and stab their victims. Guns or not, people will kill unless they have a different mindset. I have no data about Australia, but I can ask my retired Aussie cop friend when we go out for beers later this week.

As a single gun owner (a .22 rifle I use strictly for plinking and varmint), I wouldn't be directly affected by any laws concerning hand guns. I do however feel that everyone should have the right to OPEN CARRY a handgun. Stored securely in a holster, it provides no danger, only a deterrent to a would-be criminal.

If you can't tell from my posts, I'm rather liberal with somethings, but steadfast conservative with others. I consider myself an independant thinker, and only register as a Dem. because most of our local elections are decided in the primaries, and most candidates run as Dems.

[Dr_Snooz]

Are you guys seriously going to sit here and squabble about welfare and gun control?

Those arguments have been ongoing since 1960 and haven't changed a single person's mind. Meanwhile, the guys in power are passing stuff like the NDAA, the Trans Pacific Partnership, the European Stability Mechanism and buying military drones for local police departments. Do you think Obama cares about your gun collection when he can lob a hellfire missile into your living room from the air-conditioned comfort of the Oval Office? Do you think guns will save you when he sends the military to drag you off to prison, without charge, and lock you away forever on suspicion of "material aid" to terrorism?

Sometimes I wonder if maybe Americans want to be enslaved.

[Vanilla Sky]

With UAVs, he won't need such heavy firepower.

I personally take part in these threads because they're a good break from other boring things. I take my serious political debates elsewhere.

[hammer3rd]

Actually, crime in Canada is very low. They can also keep and bear arms, but not hand guns. In the UK, they typically use knives and stab their victims. Guns or not, people will kill unless they have a different mindset. I have no data about Australia, but I can ask my retired Aussie cop friend when we go out for beers later this week.

As a single gun owner (a .22 rifle I use strictly for plinking and varmint), I wouldn't be directly affected by any laws concerning hand guns. I do however feel that everyone should have the right to OPEN CARRY a handgun. Stored securely in a holster, it provides no danger, only a deterrent to a would-be criminal.

If you can't tell from my posts, I'm rather liberal with somethings, but steadfast conservative with others. I consider myself an independant thinker, and only register as a Dem. because most of our local elections are decided in the primaries, and most candidates run as Dems.

I am sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[hammer3rd]

Are you guys seriously going to sit here and squabble about welfare and gun control?

Those arguments have been ongoing since 1960 and haven't changed a single person's mind. Meanwhile, the guys in power are passing stuff like the NDAA, the Trans Pacific Partnership, the European Stability Mechanism and buying military drones for local police departments. Do you think Obama cares about your gun collection when he can lob a hellfire missile into your living room from the air-conditioned comfort of the Oval Office? Do you think guns will save you when he sends the military to drag you off to prison, without charge, and lock you away forever on suspicion of "material aid" to terrorism?

Sometimes I wonder if maybe Americans want to be enslaved.

Yes I so KNOW he cares about my guns and yours and everyone elses. And we fought off a military 236 years ago. And yes this is a much stromger military but we also outnumber them 2000 to one.

And the bigest problem is there is no unity in the US any more. Not the rich the poore the black the white the red or the yellow. But US Citizens standing for one cause. If we all (ALL) stand together we can stop al this.

[Vanilla Sky]

Sorry about what? That murders in the UK are mostly stabbings? That Canadians can have long rifles, but don't have the issues with hand gun violence we see here? Different countries with different mindsets.

Now here in the US, I want to be able to open carry any hand gun that I feel like carrying. In states with open carry, crime is typically lower than states even with concealed carry.

There are the people that freak out about the responsible open carry gun owner, though. Personally, I feel safer when I walk into a bar and I see several side arms in plain sight.

If there is a ban on handguns, I can see the gun owning population simply not complying with law. Sure, they may turn in registered guns, but they will likely also go out and purchase unregistered firearms and conceal carry them. I feel it's dangerous in some areas to NOT have a gun on your side. Have you seen what a thug does when someone pulls a gun on him? They literally shit their pants. I've seen this with my own eyes more than one time.

Now, I do think we need better control of who is able to own a firearm of any kind. A convicted felon that's committed armed robbery on more than one occasion should lose the right to own and carry firearms. A law abiding citizen should be able to do as he pleases. Remember, my right to punch you in the face ends when my fist hits your face.

[hammer3rd]

With UAVs, he won't need such heavy firepower.

I personally take part in these threads because they're a good break from other boring things. I take my serious political debates elsewhere.

I agree SKY. It has been fun learning your thoughts. I myself vote for who I belive is the best and am a regesteried independant. But so far the last few years Rep's have led the way for me. And not all Dem's are anti gun(but the majority are). And not all Rep's are pro gun either. George senior was a anti gun Rep and a strong one.

[hammer3rd]

No that you are a liberal demacrat.

I dont agree with that way of thinking.

Most things need structure to last(even a little while). And the liberal thinking (live and lrt live as long as it dont bother me) will undermine our way of liveing sooner than later.

But I dont like too much regulation either.

BUT THERE IS A DOCUMENT THAT COVERS BOUTH SIDES AND WORKS IF LAFT ALONE. THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Vanilla Sky]

See, I'd prefer pure anarchy to the current government. I don't like the way that entire parties can be bought and paid for by corporations, and the only thing that we have to show for it is a bunch of asinine laws we didn't ask for and The Jersey Shore mentality.

I fully feel that we should give individual states more rights and the federal government less control. If a state wants to fail and spend themselves into bankruptcy, buy them out for the current value of the unimproved land that the town itself holds. Sure, you're going to lose money on the ordeal, but if that happens to a few towns, the rest might just get their act together. When the fed takes over a town, they appoint people to run the town, and they have to meet certain standards. Fail to meet those standards, and you get the boot yourself.

Of course, that's a very simplistic way of looking at things, but I think it might encourage more fiscal responsibility on the local level. The only thing that's going to do the same with the fed is for the same thing to happen, a collapse of power. It's the last thing that I want to see happen, but it's not off the table.

[Vanilla Sky]

The constitution was meant to evolve as new technology and ways of thinking came along. That's why we have had many amendments. I don't think many attempts to amend the constitution should be passed, though. It's the amendments that give us the right to free speech, the right to bare arms, and protections against unreasonable search and seizure are very good ones. Attempts to amend the constitution for religious reasons shouldn't see floor time and should be struck down as soon as they come across. Issues like the right for gays to marry is one that has no reason to be a constitutional amendment. I see that as taking away the right of otherwise law abiding citizens to be happy and have access to the same rights such as hospital visitation and the ability to file as married on their tax returns, among other things. Constitutional amendments need to be for things that grant rights and protect our nation, not take away rights and control peoples' lives.

[hammer3rd]

The constitution was meant to evolve as new technology and ways of thinking came along. That's why we have had many amendments. I don't think many attempts to amend the constitution should be passed, though. It's the amendments that give us the right to free speech, the right to bare arms, and protections against unreasonable search and seizure are very good ones. Attempts to amend the constitution for religious reasons shouldn't see floor time and should be struck down as soon as they come across. Issues like the right for gays to marry is one that has no reason to be a constitutional amendment. I see that as taking away the right of otherwise law abiding citizens to be happy and have access to the same rights such as hospital visitation and the ability to file as married on their tax returns, among other things. Constitutional amendments need to be for things that grant rights and protect our nation, not take away rights and control peoples' lives.

The constitution was never ment to ba changed. It was written with a wide enough berth to cover even current times.


(Attempts to amend the constitution for religious reasons shouldn't see floor time and should be struck down as soon as they come across. Issues like the right for gays to marry is one that has no reason to be a constitutional amendment). This is where we start breaking down as a society. The religious matter is no dfferent than the freedom of speach. Even our four forefathers had religious events. I dont know the exact number but there were like a 100 or so people saved at the signing of the constitution(oh by the way seperation of church and state doesnt mean that. It stabds for the church not haveing any rule over the state and vice versa).But even animals which dont reason stay with the opposite sex. Being gay is a chioce not a right. All things were created(evolved if you are that school of thought) with procreation in mind. Same sex relationships would be the end of all life as we know it.

[Vanilla Sky]

If you really want to debate same sex couples, I think you're going to get your ass pounded, figuratively at least.

The founding fathers were Diests, not Christians.

I can cite MANY instances in nature outside of humans in which animals have homosexual relationships. If this is one of your arguments, just throw it out the window right now.

If you're really ignorant enough to think that same sex relationships will bring life to an end, maybe you should get off of your computer and use your mind to think. You seem to lack that ability. Humans have been practicing homosexuality for millennia. This is not a new thing.

The only people that want to keep homosexuals from getting married are people with minds so closed and assholes so tight that you can shove a lump of coal up their asses and it will turn into a diamond within a week.

If you're that homophobic, maybe you should try spending a few weeks reading up on it from UNBIASED sources. Scientific sources, not religious nor political sources.

And I believe that ignorance of the truth is what will end humanity, not a small portion of the population getting married.

[Vanilla Sky]

I really feel this fits the current topic of conversation.

http://eatwithjoy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/523804_486466604712105_1558774557_n.jpg?w=692

[Vanilla Sky]

As a moderator, I have decided that it's best that I no longer participate in this thread. I am letting my emotions cloud the real issues here, and it's mostly due to simple arguing. I may return if we work back towards an actual discussion about politics and about human rights instead of arguing with people that can't form their own opinions.

[hammer3rd]

If you really want to debate same sex couples, I think you're going to get your ass pounded, figuratively at least.

The founding fathers were Diests, not Christians.

I can cite MANY instances in nature outside of humans in which animals have homosexual relationships. If this is one of your arguments, just throw it out the window right now.

If you're really ignorant enough to think that same sex relationships will bring life to an end, maybe you should get off of your computer and use your mind to think. You seem to lack that ability. Humans have been practicing homosexuality for millennia. This is not a new thing.

The only people that want to keep homosexuals from getting married are people with minds so closed and assholes so tight that you can shove a lump of coal up their asses and it will turn into a diamond within a week.

If you're that homophobic, maybe you should try spending a few weeks reading up on it from UNBIASED sources. Scientific sources, not religious nor political sources.

And I believe that ignorance of the truth is what will end humanity, not a small portion of the population getting married.

This is my point. Christians dont get mad over talking about thier bilefs. But yes please show me proof of animales haveing same sex relationships. And our forefathers were indeed Christians to the core.

There is no need to show self like this. We are just talking about our beliefs. And I dont appreciate you attacking me or my inteligence that way. I have not done that to you nor would I for any reason. All life is between us humans is a series of talks and interactions. How we handle ourselfs is what seperates us from the animals.

[hammer3rd]

As a moderator, I have decided that it's best that I no longer participate in this thread. I am letting my emotions cloud the real issues here, and it's mostly due to simple arguing. I may return if we work back towards an actual discussion about politics and about human rights instead of arguing with people that can't form their own opinions.

Moderator or not you dont have to stop. We are all just people and we all have opinions about what we belive. So climbe back in the saddle and have fun.

[Vanilla Sky]

I'm having a damned nice cigar right now, so this will have to suffice until I finish. It should help answer some of your questions about homosexuality outside of humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

[hammer3rd]

I'm having a damned nice cigar right now, so this will have to suffice until I finish. It should help answer some of your questions about homosexuality outside of humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

I read through some of it(getting ready for class right now). And it was like I thought. They show sexual behavior but not actual mateings. Cause animals dont have sex for fun. Only humans do that. Humans are the only species to cary out sexual imorality. Meaning we like to screw for fun cause we are horney. And some just happen to like the same sex.

Got a good single or double malt scotch to go with that cigar.

[Vanilla Sky]

Dolphins have sex for fun. Many primates and birds do as well. Not only do these animals have sex for fun, they also have sex with the same sex. If I need to search for scientific journals that have published these findings, I am more than happy to.

And no single malt this morning. As it looks, I have to go to a car auction today and spend about $1M vicariously.

Just remember that not everything is as black and white as people make it seem.

[ecogabriel]

This went civilized for a while, then it degenerated in a rant of slogans.

One, people need weapons to defend their freedom. PLEASE!
While we argue stupid gun control, those who REALLY have power (read loads of $$$$) did not bother with that. Instead, they have taken over our political institutions. Congress is a joke; WHO the hell they represent? Us, voters? HA! There are more lobbyists than legislators and represent EVERY single business interest out there.

Every politician needs millions and millions of dollars to run a campaign. Even before ONE vote is cast, they need to gather massive resources. Where that money come from? Unions are on the decline (more on this later), so that only leaves other "organizations" in the game.
Most of the money is "anonymous"; it cannot be traced, but it backs candidates by smearing the opposition. The GOP campaigns runs mostly that way, but democrats have also jumped into the game. After all, politicians are about holding power so they would do WHATEVER it tales for that.

Who would contribute such amounts of money without expecting to receive something in exchange???

So, while we discuss slogans - the last page of postings went that way - we no longer have a representative political system.
It may still be a republic, but it would no longer advance the "common good" as defined by the people in elections; instead, it would do what those who hijacked the political institutions want done.

I wonder if guns are so damn important to protect people's freedom - as some seem to believe - how in the world Gandhi managed to free India from British rule without them.

[nswst8]

Wow. that is really deep. Deep bullshit!

First why let it get to the point of a overeaching goverment that requires a fight to regain freedom. India won it's freedom from an occupation (British rule keyword *RULE*). I for one don't want to become occupied that requires a fight. History explains to me that a people that has the freedom to arm itself can defend that freedom from ever being taken away in the first place. Our founding fathers had the wisdom to see this and thus gave us the 2nd amendment.

Money can only win elections if the people of this great country remains ignorant of the struggles this country faces. Look at our education system a great failure by the elected leaders of both parties. Dumbing us down, it's a book. Read it.

Let's just keep expanding goverment to the point that everyone works for the goverment and does what the goverment says, right they have all the answers. "Foodstamps stimulates the economy faster than the private sector" From the great Nancy Pelosi. (What a F**king joke) But you go California, your great social experiment is going well, 600 billion dollar deficit and a 16 billion dollar budget shortfall. Ready for the tax increases?

The problem is the people being to dam lazy to be aware of the over spending of the goverment. The last 30 years of economic expansion, everyone being fat dumb and happy has flatlined. The supply has met the demand, simple economics. There is no cash cow on the horizon to put us back into a over inflated economy.

We are borrowing from China to keep people on welfare. "WTF" Get a F**king job you as*hole. I have worked 2 and 3 jobs to pay the bills. I just choose to work smarter not harder in my later years. We are in a adjusting economy, this means salaries/wages are adjusting as well.

Printing more money drives the price of goods up, ( HYPER-INFLATION anyone) How about a wheel barrel full of greenbacks to buy a loaf of bread, it's in the history books. Read some. I have been buying precious metals since the late 80s, think about it.

The private sector is evolving to the state of the economy. The goverment has no clue as to the state of the economy.

[stat1K]

oh sigh this thread still?

i'm glad most of us here are so smart and have done everything right that we can preach about what should be done! kudos 3geez communitY!!!!!

[DBMaster]

If this thread has proven anything to me it's that you can't stereotype people by the types of cars they drive. ROFL!

I think I may just go back to espousing nihilism. This is the philosophy that the only option left to bring about REAL change is to scrap the entire existing system and start from scratch. What are the odds of that happening?

I am starting to think we are headed for some form of "organized anarchy." (oxymoron, I know) I rarely hear anything positive from candidates and legislators other than platitudes about how they will fix everything, return us to a "better time," or simply keep the status quo from being disturbed. What I usually hear is how much "the other guy" has screwed things up. Come on, are we THAT stupid? We no longer want what is really best for all. No one wants to sacrifice anything even though we are sacrificing daily. I really don't have the answers, but neither do our officials. And, if you really think hard about the full implications of what each of you suggest, none of you have them either.

Civilized disagreement and compromise is what we could use and it is becoming more obvious by the day that the "American People" are no longer capable of such things. I guess what we need is a good old fashioned kind of war with a clear "evil" enemy so that we can all unite as one. We are, by nature, a divisive group and if we don't have an outside enemy to fight against we seem to turn all that animosity inward upon ourselves.

Anybody want to get a shovel yet to dig me out of my b.s?

[Dr_Snooz]

the only option left to bring about REAL change is to scrap the entire existing system and start from scratch. What are the odds of that happening?

Well sir, I think we'll have a smoldering charcoal briquette, formerly known as earth, to start over with soon enough. LOL

[ecogabriel]

This is my point. Christians dont get mad over talking about thier bilefs. But yes please show me proof of animales haveing same sex relationships. And our forefathers were indeed Christians to the core.



Your "proof" here,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/magazine/04animals-t.html?pagewanted=all

Since you are in college, you may find academic papers on the topic. Try google scholar or scirus.com and you will find that several hundred animals have "homosexual" behavior.

What is your evidence to claim the Founding fathers being christian to the core?
I seriously doubt a christian would have written anything like this

http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/madison_m&r_1785.html

or written a peace accord claiming the U.S. is NOT founded in the christian religion.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Treaty_of_Tripoli_as_communicated_to_Congress_1797 .png

[nswst8]

I have hope Mike, if I didn't there would be alot of sorry a*s politicians wondering what the hell happened.

Funny thing is when I was younger I really didn't give a crap, I was just as ignorant as most of the young people today.

I'm not as concerned about our future as I am about the millions that will suffer their own ignorance. I live each and everyday not afraid of tomorrow because I prepared for it yesterday. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

[nswst8]

Quote*****"Since you are in college, you may find academic papers on the topic. Try google scholar or scirus.com and you will find that several hundred animals have "homosexual" behavior."*****

Really, if you want to be like the animals. Grow some damn fur and disappear into the woods.

I don't give a damn if your gay. Just don't tell me, I'm a homophobe just because I don't give a damn. If I did 2/3rds of my command (overseas) back in the early 80s would have been processed out if I gave a damn. They knew I was straight and I knew they were gay. They did their job and that was all I cared about.

I do give a damn that the gay community is trying to attack the church via the goverment. If they want acceptance by the church then protest the church. STOP trying to use the goverment to force the church to accept gay marriage. That is between them, the gay community and the church. Otherwise I say create your own church and marry yourselves. "Freedom of religion"

I don't even belong to a church, but trying to teach my kids about homosexuality is something I do not and will not tolerate. If they have questions that is something we disuss as a family.

I really don't don't give a sh*t.

One of George Washingtons (Officers) top military trainers from some foreign country was a gay fellow. Drummed out of his own country's military for being gay. He was a general. I've know that for decades. Who gives a sh*t, he did his job. That is all that matters.

[ecogabriel]

[QUOTE=nswst8;1099710]Quote*****"Since you are in college, you may find academic papers on the topic. Try google scholar or scirus.com and you will find that several hundred animals have "homosexual" behavior."*****

Really, if you want to be like the animals. Grow some damn fur and disappear into the woods.

/QUOTE]

I am sorry for your ignorance and even more for your absolute lack of manners.

Humans are indeed animals sharing 99 percent of genetic code with chimpanzees. Get some education.

[nswst8]

Traditional marriage and Same sex marriage, two totally separate meanings yet the same definition.

The church can only perform and bless one.

The States can perform both by the justice of the peace. Should States and federal law allow. Do I care, not really. Only if the gay community continues to push goverment involvement upon the church.

[nswst8]

[QUOTE=nswst8;1099710]Quote*****"Since you are in college, you may find academic papers on the topic. Try google scholar or scirus.com and you will find that several hundred animals have "homosexual" behavior."*****

Really, if you want to be like the animals. Grow some damn fur and disappear into the woods.

/QUOTE]

I am sorry for your ignorance and even more for your absolute lack of manners.

Humans are indeed animals sharing 99 percent of genetic code with chimpanzees. Get some education.

Exactly, go live with the chimps. Yet it's the 1% percent that separates the species. And it's that one percent that has given us medicine, music and the ability to control the number of our offspring, deep water exploration, space travel and "The walking dead series" etc, etc. You have been corrected.

[ecogabriel]

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5843/1360.abstract

http://ts-si.org/soc-&-psych/25148-new-evidence-for-social-intelligence-hypothesis

[ecogabriel]

As a moderator, I have decided that it's best that I no longer participate in this thread.
I may return if we work back towards an actual discussion about politics and about human rights instead of arguing with people that can't form their own opinions.

You will be away a long, long time then.

[nswst8]

You will be away a long, long time then.

Hear, hear, see we can agree. ROFL

Great discussion!

[hammer3rd]

I dont really know where to start. First of all we need to be civil to each of our brothers. After all we are but vessels of emotion. How we handle ourselfs is what seperates os from the animals.

I read all that was posted and looked up a lot on my own. Animals do not have sex as we do, Period. They preform sexual activities but usually to show dominance or they are young and experimenting.

Cant find anything on the albatross that supports proposfull same sex relationships.

And the all the religious papers mean the same, Religion. Which is man made. I am speaking of Christianity, meaning Christ!!!!!

But that paper went along with what I said earlier. Seperation of chursh and state.

[2oodoor]

Lol who's ever had a dog humping your leg? Did you feel sexually assaulted or was it fun (funny) or were you devastated with guilt's of bestiality because you were a participant.

How many years have you tolerated the dog humping your leg? Snicker, :o) its so much an issue of perspective which we as individuals have a choice. How things make us feel.

Same sex marriages open a door to fraud and embezzlement, probably UN-prosecute able due to the legal doc of the union. Like a catalyst making unethical and yes immoral activity the norm , which violates freedom. Note that this would have nothing at all to do with homosexuality, since the contenders would not necessarily need to be homo.
So can the debate of public safety be used in opposition to SSM? I think it is about as strong as any alliance for SSM.

[DBMaster]

The "founding fathers" were pretty much deists, or possibly process theologians. That's why there was so much mention of providence - which still appears on our money. Obama was blasted for stating that the United States is not a "Christian nation." This is true. To state that it is would be a clear violation of the separation of church and state and negate freedom of religion. Christian principles, for the most part, are common to most religions. I am talking primarily about the tenets that form the basis of common law. I think it's great that elected officials have morals and live by the ethical codes they learned from their religions upbringings. Just don't force it down my throat or down anyone else's.

[Vanilla Sky]

Guy, there's just as much fraud that happens because people of the opposite sex can get married. I know of a gay male couple and a gay female couple that married each other so that there were 2 heterosexual marriages. They did this so they could buy insurance at a discounted rate through work. Gay marriage won't increase fraud any more than heterosexual marriages.

Dolphins do in fact have gay sex. It's pretty common for dolphins.

Either way, the only people that want to stop gay marriage are people that use religion as their basis of their hatred.

[nswst8]

Guy, there's just as much fraud that happens because people of the opposite sex can get married. I know of a gay male couple and a gay female couple that married each other so that there were 2 heterosexual marriages. They did this so they could buy insurance at a discounted rate through work. Gay marriage won't increase fraud any more than heterosexual marriages.

Dolphins do in fact have gay sex. It's pretty common for dolphins.

Either way, the only people that want to stop gay marriage are people that use religion as their basis of their hatred.

Welcome back. It's not hatred, just a belief that marriage under the church is defined as the traditional marriage between a man and woman.

Now stop the comparison between animal and humans. Talk about the physiological/genetic confusion placed upon the human body at conception. Man with woman organs and vice versa. It is my opinion that the senses as well become confused.

[ecogabriel]

[QUOTE=ecogabriel;1099716]

Exactly, go live with the chimps. Yet it's the 1% percent that separates the species. And it's that one percent that has given us medicine, music and the ability to control the number of our offspring, deep water exploration, space travel and "The walking dead series" etc, etc. You have been corrected.

Several behavioral traits are similar to those of apes; in fact, we have made war the same way chimpanzees do, down to cannibalism.

http://evolutionaryanthropology.duke.edu/research/3chimps/chimps-bonobos

Even when patrolling they look like human troops; same for tool use and teaching/learning to use them,

http://ocw.nd.edu/anthropology/primate-behavior/lectures-1/session-10-the-chimpanzees

The most accepted hypothesis for human intelligence is that it evolved as result of the special needs of social interaction
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5843/1360.short

That explains why a technological civilization is quite recent in human history (10000 years or so)
Rather than been corrected, what I have said is what science says today
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1567/1008

[hammer3rd]

The "founding fathers" were pretty much deists, or possibly process theologians. That's why there was so much mention of providence - which still appears on our money. Obama was blasted for stating that the United States is not a "Christian nation." This is true. To state that it is would be a clear violation of the separation of church and state and negate freedom of religion. Christian principles, for the most part, are common to most religions. I am talking primarily about the tenets that form the basis of common law. I think it's great that elected officials have morals and live by the ethical codes they learned from their religions upbringings. Just don't force it down my throat or down anyone else's.

No one is forceing anything down anyones throat. But the very thought that this great Country was built without the guidance of great Christian leaders is funny. No way all that was laid out before us was just because they were(smart).

But as I said eailer in the post. The seperation of church and state doesnt mean that they dont influence one another but rather that they cant rule over one another.

[hammer3rd]

Guy, there's just as much fraud that happens because people of the opposite sex can get married. I know of a gay male couple and a gay female couple that married each other so that there were 2 heterosexual marriages. They did this so they could buy insurance at a discounted rate through work. Gay marriage won't increase fraud any more than heterosexual marriages.

Dolphins do in fact have gay sex. It's pretty common for dolphins.

Either way, the only people that want to stop gay marriage are people that use religion as their basis of their hatred.

Dolphins infact do not have sex but rather show dominance, and the juvenile males experament amd play with dominance among themselves.

No one has ever said anything about hatred in this post, just that it was immoral and should not happen.

[hammer3rd]

[QUOTE=nswst8;1099721]

Several behavioral traits are similar to those of apes; in fact, we have made war the same way chimpanzees do, down to cannibalism.

http://evolutionaryanthropology.duke.edu/research/3chimps/chimps-bonobos

Even when patrolling they look like human troops; same for tool use and teaching/learning to use them,

http://ocw.nd.edu/anthropology/primate-behavior/lectures-1/session-10-the-chimpanzees

The most accepted hypothesis for human intelligence is that it evolved as result of the special needs of social interaction
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5843/1360.short

That explains why a technological civilization is quite recent in human history (10000 years or so)
Rather than been corrected, what I have said is what science says today
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1567/1008

Well first off we did not evolve. We were created. Good example why dont we all look alike. If we evolved then why did we do differant than aii other animals. Look at a herd of Zebra for example. At 100 feet without measuring the stripes you for all intensive purposes cant tell one from the other. Same with primates, birds(male and female excluded), and all other animals. We are so differant because we did not come down the evolutionary line.

And as far as tecnology is concerned it is snowball effect. Once it is started down the hill it gets really big in a hurry.

[DBMaster]

I was speaking in general terms about legislated morality. You cannot legislate morality any more than you can legislate common sense. Living in Texas I get to see a lot of nonsensical things done in the name of others' senses of morality.

The type of violence and persecution that results from the establishment of an "official" religion is one of the things that the framers of the constitution hoped to avoid. I have met so many people in my life who would throw it all away to have their own ideas of morality be legally required.

[Vanilla Sky]

Le's not make this a creationist argument. Even the Catholic Church has accepted evolution. I fully do believe that we are an evolved primate, but that doesn't explain where life itself came from. We can trace stars back to milliseconds after the big bang, but we can't explain nearly as well what caused the big bang, nor can we trace life back.

Marriage stopped being a strictly religious institution once the government got involved and created different rules for married people. I'd personally be satisfied if the government simply called all marriages civil unions and ignored the sex of the individuals getting married. I don't feel that they should deny any two people willing to enter a legal contract based on the grounds that they both have the same genitalia. If a church wants to deny it, then fine. We're talking about an issue of civil rights here, not forcing churches to marry couples that they don't want to marry.

[hammer3rd]

Its funny what you guys are posting trying to prove your points about same sex realationships. Bui I watched and read all this stuff some 20 years ago(some of the same names and studies) before homosexuality was such a big deal. And and my gradfather who is deeply christian, told me then that this stuff would be used tp try to prove points about homosexuality

And one thing you guys are missing is I am not talking about religion(which is man made) but Christianity. There has probably been more killed in the name of religion than all wars combined, but Christianity is not that way. It doesnt force things down your throats but simply tells you right from wrong and helps lead you to a better place. If you dont like it then we go away.

I just want to thank all takeing part in this little discusion. You are all a cool bunch of guys.

Now DING DING!!!!!!!!!!!

[hammer3rd]

Le's not make this a creationist argument. Even the Catholic Church has accepted evolution. I fully do believe that we are an evolved primate, but that doesn't explain where life itself came from. We can trace stars back to milliseconds after the big bang, but we can't explain nearly as well what caused the big bang, nor can we trace life back.

Marriage stopped being a strictly religious institution once the government got involved and created different rules for married people. I'd personally be satisfied if the government simply called all marriages civil unions and ignored the sex of the individuals getting married. I don't feel that they should deny any two people willing to enter a legal contract based on the grounds that they both have the same genitalia. If a church wants to deny it, then fine. We're talking about an issue of civil rights here, not forcing churches to marry couples that they don't want to marry.

I respect your thoughts but there is no conclusive evidence that we came from primates.

[2oodoor]

No two zebras have the same Stripes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra) unless they were cloned.

This discussion is good as long as you can learn from others point of view, it may or may not fit your current POV but some of it may fill in the blanks on a few things. It takes laying it all out like this to get it sorted out on your own.

[hammer3rd]

No two zebras have the same Stripes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra) unless they were cloned.

This discussion is good as long as you can learn from others point of view, it may or may not fit your current POV but some of it may fill in the blanks on a few things. It takes laying it all out like this to get it sorted out on your own.

I know they dont have the same stripes but like I said unless you pull out your tapemesure to measure them they do all look alike. And we as humans do not.

My POV hasnt changed but I do like learning new things fron other members. And the web posts have been a real good read. Not saying I dont have many blanks that need filling but unless something HUGE happens on the evolution side of things I still belive we were created by a higher power. Not all is understood as with all things but definitely not a monkeys uncle.

[2oodoor]

I wasn't directing that to you Mike it was an open statement to the room.
There is wisdom amongst the rhetoric. Lol

[DBMaster]

At what point in history did we become so overly sensitive that we are offended by so many things? I've never seen so many half-hearted public apologies in my life. One of the beautiful things about living here in the U.S. is that we are supposed to be able to express our opinions without fear. I like to avoid the use of absolute terms like "never, always, no one, or everyone." There are rarely instances where these words ring true. If I respond to any of your rebuttals I am merely clarifying my stance. I am rarely offended by anything. I am simply fascinated by the level of polar, absolute sorts of statements people are making these days. I do not think it a good practice to become inflexible. I can be swayed by a persuasive argument backed up by facts, not emotionalism. Most of what I see in politics these days is emotionally charged. Take, for example, the whole "Obamacare" issue. Very few people really understand anything beyond the fact that it is CHANGE. Oh, yeah, we're scared of CHANGE. Don't mess with my perfect health care system - NOT! Let's just repeal it and replace it with something that makes sense. Again - NOT! Let's take away the fear by rolling back the change and return us to the same broken system that will ultimately fail. Don't think that I am saying that the new system will be awesome. It just represents the first meaningful change we have had since Nixon took on healthcare reform. Obama did what Clinton couldn't and I am proud of him for doing so. If the GOP is successful in its totally political efforts to repeal the Act we will end up back where we were with no meaningful change on the horizon for the foreseeable future.

BTW, don't interpret this to mean that I am a liberal. I go with my gut, regardless of party. I have advocated the abolition of the party system since I could understand politics. Partisanship breeds ignorance and laziness as far as I am concerned. It's a hell of a lot easier to toe the party line than it is to actually form an opinion and defend it.

[2oodoor]

I know! Right, what "is" that? Depends on "what your definition of is, is"
Remember who said that? Lol

Oh and to assist in researching your question, watch about five episodes of the tv show Repo Games. Its on Spike tv, ignorance epidemic exposition.
Its the one they have to answer extremely easy trivia questions to have the car paid off free of repo.

[2drSE-i]

Sorry about what? That murders in the UK are mostly stabbings? That Canadians can have long rifles, but don't have the issues with hand gun violence we see here? Different countries with different mindsets.

Now here in the US, I want to be able to open carry any hand gun that I feel like carrying. In states with open carry, crime is typically lower than states even with concealed carry.

There are the people that freak out about the responsible open carry gun owner, though. Personally, I feel safer when I walk into a bar and I see several side arms in plain sight.

If there is a ban on handguns, I can see the gun owning population simply not complying with law. Sure, they may turn in registered guns, but they will likely also go out and purchase unregistered firearms and conceal carry them. I feel it's dangerous in some areas to NOT have a gun on your side. Have you seen what a thug does when someone pulls a gun on him? They literally shit their pants. I've seen this with my own eyes more than one time.

Now, I do think we need better control of who is able to own a firearm of any kind. A convicted felon that's committed armed robbery on more than one occasion should lose the right to own and carry firearms. A law abiding citizen should be able to do as he pleases. Remember, my right to punch you in the face ends when my fist hits your face.
Convicted felons, by federal law, have lost their second amendment right. You cannot own a firearm, and they check for it any time you purchase one. I don't think firearms belong in bars, but I'd be fine with it if it were along the lines of operating a vehicle.

Attempts to amend the constitution for religious reasons shouldn't see floor time and should be struck down as soon as they come across. Issues like the right for gays to marry is one that has no reason to be a constitutional amendment. I see that as taking away the right of otherwise law abiding citizens to be happy and have access to the same rights such as hospital visitation and the ability to file as married on their tax returns, among other things. Constitutional amendments need to be for things that grant rights and protect our nation, not take away rights and control peoples' lives.
Yup. Why are we telling people who they can and can't marry?

But even animals which dont reason stay with the opposite sex. Being gay is a chioce not a right. All things were created(evolved if you are that school of thought) with procreation in mind. Same sex relationships would be the end of all life as we know it.
Animals don't get married, live in houses or wear pants. What's your point? Being gay is NOT a choice. If that is the case, then it is a choice that I make every day to not be attracted to my sofa. It is how you're wired.


The only people that want to keep homosexuals from getting married are people with minds so closed and assholes so tight that you can shove a lump of coal up their asses and it will turn into a diamond within a week.

LOL

As a moderator, I have decided that it's best that I no longer participate in this thread. I am letting my emotions cloud the real issues here, and it's mostly due to simple arguing. I may return if we work back towards an actual discussion about politics and about human rights instead of arguing with people that can't form their own opinions.
I thought you were doing fine. Making good points, and being civil. That's what we are going for here.

Moderator or not you dont have to stop. We are all just people and we all have opinions about what we belive. So climbe back in the saddle and have fun.
Agreed

I read through some of it(getting ready for class right now). And it was like I thought. They show sexual behavior but not actual mateings. Cause animals dont have sex for fun. Only humans do that. Humans are the only species to cary out sexual imorality. Meaning we like to screw for fun cause we are horney. And some just happen to like the same sex.
Can we concede this point now?


One, people need weapons to defend their freedom. PLEASE!
While we argue stupid gun control, those who REALLY have power (read loads of $$$$) did not bother with that. Instead, they have taken over our political institutions. Congress is a joke; WHO the hell they represent? Us, voters? HA! There are more lobbyists than legislators and represent EVERY single business interest out there.

Every politician needs millions and millions of dollars to run a campaign. Even before ONE vote is cast, they need to gather massive resources. Where that money come from? Unions are on the decline (more on this later), so that only leaves other "organizations" in the game.
Most of the money is "anonymous"; it cannot be traced, but it backs candidates by smearing the opposition. The GOP campaigns runs mostly that way, but democrats have also jumped into the game. After all, politicians are about holding power so they would do WHATEVER it tales for that.

Who would contribute such amounts of money without expecting to receive something in exchange???

So, while we discuss slogans - the last page of postings went that way - we no longer have a representative political system.
It may still be a republic, but it would no longer advance the "common good" as defined by the people in elections; instead, it would do what those who hijacked the political institutions want done.

I wonder if guns are so damn important to protect people's freedom - as some seem to believe - how in the world Gandhi managed to free India from British rule without them.

It's not that guns are necessary to protect freedom, we are in the age of Smart bombs, chemical warfare and UAV's. It's that they represent our freedom. What other personal item in your home represents part of the Bill of Rights? A single gun (or even 30 that gun-nuts seem to stockpile) isn't going to mean a damn thing if a SWAT team is at your door.
(Beware, cheesy-ass slogan coming)
Laziness is what we sold our country for, and without major revolution, we can't buy it back.

[nswst8]

I respect your thoughts but there is no conclusive evidence that we came from primates.

Thank you.

[nswst8]

I know! Right, what "is" that? Depends on "what your definition of is, is"
Remember who said that? Lol

Oh and to assist in researching your question, watch about five episodes of the tv show Repo Games. Its on Spike tv, ignorance epidemic exposition.
Its the one they have to answer extremely easy trivia questions to have the car paid off free of repo.

That piss ant Clinton!

[Vanilla Sky]

And and my gradfather who is deeply christian, told me then that this stuff would be used tp try to prove points about homosexuality.

Of course. Your grandfather is a bigot. He probably has similar feelings for monorities.


I respect your thoughts but there is no conclusive evidence that we came from primates.

Saying that is like being able to tell the color of a door in a lightless hallway you've never been down.

While there may be no "conclusive" evidence for evolution, there is no evidence outside of religious texts stating otherwise.


That piss ant Clinton!

That's because he cut military funding during peace time. Unless you're a Kennedy hater, it's not over Monica.

[2drSE-i]

Saying that is like being able to tell the color of a door in a lightless hallway you've never been down.

While there may be no "conclusive" evidence for evolution, there is no evidence outside of religious texts stating otherwise.



That's because he cut military funding during peace time. Unless you're a Kennedy hater, it's not over Monica.

There's no conclusive evidence we aren't in the matrix either.


And that is why there will never be peace again. The "powers that be" (is that the correct terminology?) won't let it happen.

[hammer3rd]

At what point in history did we become so overly sensitive that we are offended by so many things? I've never seen so many half-hearted public apologies in my life. One of the beautiful things about living here in the U.S. is that we are supposed to be able to express our opinions without fear. I like to avoid the use of absolute terms like "never, always, no one, or everyone." There are rarely instances where these words ring true. If I respond to any of your rebuttals I am merely clarifying my stance. I am rarely offended by anything. I am simply fascinated by the level of polar, absolute sorts of statements people are making these days. I do not think it a good practice to become inflexible. I can be swayed by a persuasive argument backed up by facts, not emotionalism. Most of what I see in politics these days is emotionally charged. Take, for example, the whole "Obamacare" issue. Very few people really understand anything beyond the fact that it is CHANGE. Oh, yeah, we're scared of CHANGE. Don't mess with my perfect health care system - NOT! Let's just repeal it and replace it with something that makes sense. Again - NOT! Let's take away the fear by rolling back the change and return us to the same broken system that will ultimately fail. Don't think that I am saying that the new system will be awesome. It just represents the first meaningful change we have had since Nixon took on healthcare reform. Obama did what Clinton couldn't and I am proud of him for doing so. If the GOP is successful in its totally political efforts to repeal the Act we will end up back where we were with no meaningful change on the horizon for the foreseeable future.

BTW, don't interpret this to mean that I am a liberal. I go with my gut, regardless of party. I have advocated the abolition of the party system since I could understand politics. Partisanship breeds ignorance and laziness as far as I am concerned. It's a hell of a lot easier to toe the party line than it is to actually form an opinion and defend it.

I agree we are overly sensitive. People just need to lay back because it is only opinion and words.

The health care thing is a nerve and you are correct. We dont like change but there is more wrong whith the new than the old by far.

And all partys need to go away along with all the special intrest groups and lobbyists.

[hammer3rd]

I wasn't directing that to you Mike it was an open statement to the room.
There is wisdom amongst the rhetoric. Lol

I know Guy. I was stateing my opinion.

[hammer3rd]

Originally Posted by hammer3rd
But even animals which dont reason stay with the opposite sex. Being gay is a chioce not a right. All things were created(evolved if you are that school of thought) with procreation in mind. Same sex relationships would be the end of all life as we know it.

Animals don't get married, live in houses or wear pants. What's your point? Being gay is NOT a choice. If that is the case, then it is a choice that I make every day to not be attracted to my sofa. It is how you're wired.

That is correct. That is why they act on instinct and not emotion(its really how thay are wired, dna kinda thing). They dont reason what they are going to do they just do it.

And yes the sofe thing is a choice as well as being gay or alcoholic. We as humans on the other hand think and reason to what we like or want. Then if we really like it then we were born that way or it is the way we are wired.

[hammer3rd]

Of course. Your grandfather is a bigot. He probably has similar feelings for monorities.



Saying that is like being able to tell the color of a door in a lightless hallway you've never been down.

While there may be no "conclusive" evidence for evolution, there is no evidence outside of religious texts stating otherwise.



That's because he cut military funding during peace time. Unless you're a Kennedy hater, it's not over Monica.

No my grandfather is not a bigot. He was is the most understanding (MAN) I have ever kown. He truly belives (like God said) that all men are created equal. But in his words, we as a species push the limits of everything. Try new things to see if we like them. Then if we do make up something to support our findings. Like he said if we were or another species were ment to be a certain way we would be wired that was as a whole.

This is to Sky.(Saying that is like being able to tell the color of a door in a lightless hallway you've never been down) What, no need to call Dion Warwick but you dont need to guess if you have all the facts, that is all I am saying. If/when thay prove we came from something other than the hand of God then I will look into it is all I am saying. Not that your wrong but but not enough proof for me.

And no I do not care for the Kennedys either, or Malcome X. Good men wrong time and approach.

[hammer3rd]

There's no conclusive evidence we aren't in the matrix either.


And that is why there will never be peace again. The "powers that be" (is that the correct terminology?) won't let it happen.

No God or Jesus will do unless you are talking about the government. But because of him there will be peace/could be here if we allowed it.
And if it is up the man then you are right and the government will not let us ba at peace. It doesnt help them controll us.

[DBMaster]

Am I the only one incensed by Congress wasting all this time and taxpayer money to make its 33rd attempt to repeal "Obamacare?" They KNOW they are wasting their time, but for some reason think that we, the blessed "American People" expect them to do it. I am sure that there are other obstructionist things that Congress can be doing to waste our money. It's the only thing they seem to be REALLY good at.

[nswst8]

The house has passed 30+ jobs bills that the senate is sitting on. The Senate has not passed a budget since 2009. Social security is failing, Medicare is failing and now they dump a Healthcare law that we cannot afford.

I have had healtcare coverage since the age of 17, it's not that difficult. Most people don't like being told that they must meet their needs first before they get what they want. Needs and wants. It's not difficult. Most just want to keep up with the Jones.

Again, "The majority of Americans are too stupid to realize how stupid they really are."

I for one support repealling Obamacare and have contacted the Speaker of the house supporting the repeal.

Of course more will suffer than be helped under this shame of a healthcare law.

2700 pages and in the great words Nancy Pelosi " We must pass it, to find out whats in it" Does the word "STUPID" come to mind!

Another 30,000 + pages and counting of regulations from the Healthcare services office.

[nswst8]

I am all for healthcare reform but not at the expense of the financial security of this country. Medicare cost 9 times it's original cost. Social security is failing because they won't keep their hands off the trust.

And now you trust them with your healthcare? Are you stupid?

[nswst8]

Who here wants to model our economy after Europe. Has anyone one been watching what is going on in Europe. We have the opportunity to see what happens when socialism fails.

I for one say F**K NO! Our ancestor left europe for a reason. I've been to europe and have no desire to model our economy after theirs.

Vallejo, CA. Stockton, CA. Harrisburg, PA. Scranton, PA. San diego, CA. What do they have in common? And the many other smaller townships across the country that have had to reorganize their budgets through "BANKRUPTCY"

[nswst8]

Time to get back to work, gotta pay for the lazy f**ks of our society.

[nswst8]

San bernardino, CA just filed for bankruptcy.

[DBMaster]

It is not socialized medicine - at least not alone - that is bankrupting European countries. Some of what I hear you saying is the type of fear mongering that the GOP has been foisting upon us ever since the Clintons tried to reform healthcare in 1993. By all means, leave healthcare just the way it is, in the hands of for-profit providers and insurance companies. I have had health coverage for years as well, even when unemployed, because I cannot afford to go broke if something happens to me. I live in the state that has the highest percentage of uninsured people - over 27%. Who do you think pays for their ER visits? My employer provided insurance coverage gets more expensive every year and pays for less. Our current system is NOT a healthcare system. It is a "sick care" system. You bet with the insurance company that you will need it and they make it as hard as possible to use it. All this crap about "the government inserting itself into the doctor/patient relationship" is such bull shit! How much worse is that than a for profit entity inserting itself into that relationship. And, if you actually NEED healthcare, forget it. You can't afford the insurance because, hey, you won't be a profitable insurance consumer.

The Republicans LOVE fear mongering. Almost everything they do is to block change and keep things the "good old way" that they were. If they repeal the healthcare act there will be NOTHING to take its place for another twenty years. More people will become uninsured, the rest of us will pay ever higher bills, and hospitals and insurance companies will continue to be the beneficiaries courtesy of their Washington lackies.

I think I had better quit on this thread because I have gotten to a point where my own emotionalism won't let me be objective anymore. I have to do some studying on the act so at least I will speak from knowledge instead of fear.

[nswst8]

Well you would have an arguement if I were a Republican. I vote as an Independent. I do support reform. History informs us that this is something that will get worst before it gets any better. In it's current form it is to expensive. Had the Dems been trying to clean the damn thing up then you might have an arguement. They still don't want to read the damn thing.

Healthcare is here, this is for certain. Now we have to fix the damn thing to something more sustainable.

We could have had tax reform, immigration reform and healthcare reform had the Dems sobered up enough, instead they spent 2 freaking years stuffing a bill full of crap.

If Clinton was responsible for the economy of the 90s, where is he now? Why is he not helping this President bring back the economy he reportedly created. I'm sure he would be praised and revered as a hero, if in fact he ever did create the economy he enjoyed as a sitting President.

[DBMaster]

I do want to clarify again that I am not aligned with any party, but obviously have some liberal leanings and some conservative leanings. We just need to decide if healthcare is a right or a privilege. If it's a right then it has to be socialized. If not, then hospitals should be able to turn people away who can't pay and leave the public sector to deal with the mess. You KNOW that's what privately owned hospitals would do if they could. I seem to recall a lot of bickering about the act with ultimate passage by Congress. Once the fear set it there was plenty of backpedaling. What a dysfunctional lot.

[hammer3rd]

All I want to know is what was wrong with healtcare before. Since nobammacare was passed it has got more and more costly with less coverage. And we as a nation sure cant afford to pay for the thing either. Part the healthcare bill is comfort care, That is where when a person reaches the age of 70(after paying taxes for 50 plus years) all you get is pain managment. No matter what is wrong with you you cant get any more help. And has anyone seen the part where you are made but health care at a price set by the government. You will have a blank on your W2 asking if you have healthcare and if no you are either told go purchase some(hot free even to the poor) or get fined for not haveing it.

[nswst8]

Give a mouse a cookie???????........................Eventually, it will want a glass of milk.

When the private sector became involved into the healthcare business, guidelines should have been put in place. When auto/life insurance became available across state lines the price dropped. I remember being a young sailor having to buy new insurance upon receiving PCS orders. What a pain in the ass that was.

We were not born doctors, thus meaning that our well being was placed upon ourselves. Being responsible for ourselves is a burden placed upon us at birth.

My health insurance is above the general population because we choose to pay the higher premium for the better access. I am no genius, we choose to live within our means and ensure that the needs of the family are met first. (Food, shelter, clothing, medical necessity)

But because the price of healthcare coverage is going to be more expensive my premiums are rising not lowering as was promised by the current dickhead in office.

It's like a car, is a car a right or a privilege? if you can't afford a car then you don't get a car.

[DBMaster]

LOL! You guys actually think like I do. I think any system that absolves, or looks like it absolves, someone of their personal responsibility sucks. Why should I pay for someone who treated themselves like shit and ended up diabetic, hypertensive, obese, etc. On the other hand, if we don't find a way to manage the mess financially we all suffer.

In Texas a rather large percentage of people don't have auto insurance, even though it is required. Pretty much everyone I know, including my ex-wife has been involved in an accident where an uninsured driver was at fault. So, they drive crappy cars, have no license, and no insurance. At least the state finally started confiscating cars, but there are pretty much no real consequences.

Any system that tries to resolve issues created by a lack of personal responsibility is doomed to fail. All I was trying to really express with all my rambling is that no one was actually trying to do anything about it. I was merely impressed that someone finally did something. My brother is one of those aforementioned people who has a litany of health problems at a young age. If I let myself go like that I accept the fact that I am going to die young. We want to have our cake and eat it. Become a messed up sack and then let the government keep you on meds and alive. What a country!

[DBMaster]

I'm sorry, guys, I do tend to (eventually) become more passionate in my opinions. I do not think that any system is going to be good for everyone. I only believe that we were getting to a point where something - anything - had to be done just to prove that it could be. After my big disappointment in 1993 I figured that the medical-industrial complex was too big and influential to ever be unhinged.

I truly believe that the U.S. is in serious moral, ethical, political, social, and ideological decline. There's no going back. If we don't find a way to operate efficiently the grand experiment will produce some very unexpected results. Just the fact that none of us can agree upon anything other than what the problems are is quite telling.

[hammer3rd]

I'm sorry, guys, I do tend to (eventually) become more passionate in my opinions. I do not think that any system is going to be good for everyone. I only believe that we were getting to a point where something - anything - had to be done just to prove that it could be. After my big disappointment in 1993 I figured that the medical-industrial complex was too big and influential to ever be unhinged.

I truly believe that the U.S. is in serious moral, ethical, political, social, and ideological decline. There's no going back. If we don't find a way to operate efficiently the grand experiment will produce some very unexpected results. Just the fact that none of us can agree upon anything other than what the problems are is quite telling.

The biggest 2 things I see wrong with the old system was greed and people who are not citizens with no obligation to pay anything for any type of healthcaer services.

[DBMaster]

Mike,

While I do recognize non-citizens cashing in on overly generous benefits, I see natural born Americans cashing in to a disgusting degree. Shedding personal responsibility in exchange for suckling at the public teat is something that I consider an offense deserving of euthanasia. Do you still think I am liberal? If you don't want to actively participate in society, fine, but don't expect public support for your shit headed-ness.

[hammer3rd]

Mike,

While I do recognize non-citizens cashing in on overly generous benefits, I see natural born Americans cashing in to a disgusting degree. Shedding personal responsibility in exchange for suckling at the public teat is something that I consider an offense deserving of euthanasia. Do you still think I am liberal? If you don't want to actively participate in society, fine, but don't expect public support for your shit headed-ness.

I agree with you but at least the hospitals and banks can go after citizens and some times get some of the money back. But with ileagles all is gone. No way to trace back to them and get anything. But still no need to call them shitheads.

[DBMaster]

I was referring to behavior, not individuals. And, I meant ALL, not just illegal immigrants. Even normally upstanding, responsible people can do things that are "shit headed." It's predominantly illegals driving around here with no insurance, too. Basically, no consequences for them, but for us if we are involved in an accident with their barely road-worthy cars. But, do I think illegals are as big a problem as the press tries to make us think they are? No, I don't. The problem is still individuals who are not willing to put any effort into the system and just have a "what's in it for me" attitude.

You see? Our discussion has now come full circle.

[nswst8]

I'm sorry, guys, I do tend to (eventually) become more passionate in my opinions. I do not think that any system is going to be good for everyone. I only believe that we were getting to a point where something - anything - had to be done just to prove that it could be. After my big disappointment in 1993 I figured that the medical-industrial complex was too big and influential to ever be unhinged.

I truly believe that the U.S. is in serious moral, ethical, political, social, and ideological decline. There's no going back. If we don't find a way to operate efficiently the grand experiment will produce some very unexpected results. Just the fact that none of us can agree upon anything other than what the problems are is quite telling.

Hey Mike don't apologize. I enjoy these discussions and debate. These rants are a great way to get crap out on the table for disscusion.

[nswst8]

One of the reasons I won't start up another business (espescially here in CA) is that with the cost of unemployment insurance workmans compesation insurance and now health insurance, license and tax requirements I would be paying 65-85% on every dollars I made. Until I see those numbers stabilize, I will not be starting another business anytime soon.

I could start another business like I sold back in Texas in 2008. It's just not worth it right now to me. People are unemployed because people like me are not opening business's because we don't know what the profit margin will be.

My disappointment as a business owner/operator was the fact I paid a higher wage in lieu of healthcare I could not afford because of being a small business. The price of those policies would have put me in to red . My position was why should I work to pay for being a business owner.

[Vanilla Sky]

Phil, I'm with you there on small businesses. My friend and I are looking to open a bicycle shop, and we really want to know what this is going to actually cost the business. It's not much, but we'd be creating 2-3 jobs on top of employing ourselves. Without knowing how much that is going to eat into our profits, we're hesitant to open shop.

Requiring health care could make insurance rates go down, but I doubt they'll ever be affordable for all.

Personally, I think they shouldn't have passed the bill into law without a public option. I think it's asinine to pay a tax because I don't purchase something from a private company. If they're going to tax someone for not having it, they should be getting health care coverage similar to Medicare. Sure, it might suck, but you would have coverage and you still have the option to purchase your own coverage.

Then again, I think the whole thing is half-assed.

[DBMaster]

If you have less than 50 employees you won't be required to offer health insurance. The affordable healthcare act will not result in everyone having coverage. The idea is that by requiring (or attempting to require) everyone to participate it greatly expands the risk pool and would thus bring down the cost for everyone. There would also need to be cost controls in place. Don't get me started on capitated rates. The AMA and medical/industrial complex has whined about those for years. Medicare and Medicaid patients generally come with capitated rates for providers. I used to manage dialysis clinics. Dialysis treatments are paid for primarily by Medicare and that is for people of ALL ages, not just those over 65. Several large companies have made very huge sums of money operating outpatient clinics on capitated rates. If we are insistent upon being a nation of unhealthy individuals you have to expect something to give. In order to provide some basic level of care for everyone you're not going to get Cadillac medical care. Those that can afford it will still be able to buy it on their own, but there is always going to be a huge social cost to the epidemic we have of "prosperity diseases."

[nswst8]

Phil, I'm with you there on small businesses. My friend and I are looking to open a bicycle shop, and we really want to know what this is going to actually cost the business. It's not much, but we'd be creating 2-3 jobs on top of employing ourselves. Without knowing how much that is going to eat into our profits, we're hesitant to open shop.

Requiring health care could make insurance rates go down, but I doubt they'll ever be affordable for all.

Personally, I think they shouldn't have passed the bill into law without a public option. I think it's asinine to pay a tax because I don't purchase something from a private company. If they're going to tax someone for not having it, they should be getting health care coverage similar to Medicare. Sure, it might suck, but you would have coverage and you still have the option to purchase your own coverage.

Then again, I think the whole thing is half-assed.

Yes, I did not have to provide health insurance but as an employer I wanted to use my business as a tool for insuring my employees. I could not even afford the states exchange for small business. Yet if I could have bought across state lines I could have provided good quality basic coverage.

Your overhead costs is what manages your profits. Most start up's don't make it the first 2 years and 50% won't last 5 years. I'm not trying to discourage you but want you to understand the odds.

operating costs:

place of operation
utilities
equipment cost (Lease or purchase?)
license cost
workmans compensation
business insurance (Theft, liability)
bonding (depends on type of business) usually large jobs require bonding insurance.
Inventory costs


Now the big question, after all of your overhhead costs are met what are you able to pay yourself? ( hint: allow yourself a liveable wage) This will determine your ability to have employees beside yourself.

How much of a demand does your service have in your community?

[Vanilla Sky]

He owns a bicycle restoration business now, but there's no store front. What we're concerned about is making enough money to afford coverage ourselves and still be able to pay employees enough so that they can afford it themselves.

We have a good handle on the business side of things, we're just concerned that we'll make less doing that than we do now by the time we account for insurance being paid for out of what we earn. I just hope that being able to buy insurance from out of state will offset costs considerably.

[DBMaster]

I am inspired by the fact that you guys actually care about your employees. These days, large corporations pay lip service to that, but it's all about making the numbers. Though, it is refreshing to have an honest relationship with one's employer. You pay me, I give you my labor and talent. Period. It is my policy to give my employer high quality effort. Dedicating myself to my job at the expense of my health and family is not an option.

[hammer3rd]

Hey guys. Sorry to leave you all so quickly. Finals around the corner and hitting the books hard. Very hard to teach a brick anything.

[Vanilla Sky]

Happy and healthy employees are far more productive and reliable than a pissed off sick employee. I've seen this happen from both sides of the coin, both through the eyes of an employee and again through the eyes of an employer. When I'm healthy and happy, Im more willing to go the extra mile than when I'm unhappy and sick. There really is something to treating your employees right.

[DBMaster]

Want to talk about "happy" employees? JC Penney laid off around 660 people just a few months ago followed by another 350 just last week. I then got my weekly indeed.com job openings email and saw several jobs in procurement (my profession) open at JC Penney. Seems like they are getting rid of a lot of tenured people and then replacing some of them with "cheaper" people.

What a way to inspire loyalty!! Corporate America deserves no loyalty!

[cygnus x-1]

Want to talk about "happy" employees? JC Penney laid off around 660 people just a few months ago followed by another 350 just last week. I then got my weekly indeed.com job openings email and saw several jobs in procurement (my profession) open at JC Penney. Seems like they are getting rid of a lot of tenured people and then replacing some of them with "cheaper" people.


This seems to be the new standard way of doing things for large corporations. The large medical device company I used to work for went down hill in a hurry right after they implemented this. In just 2 years the employee turn over rate was 60%. Ill be having none of that thank you.




He owns a bicycle restoration business now, but there's no store front. What we're concerned about is making enough money to afford coverage ourselves and still be able to pay employees enough so that they can afford it themselves.

I think you're going to find this exceedingly difficult if not impossible. I worked in a bike shop throughout most of the 1990's and looking back at what I made there is no way I could have lived on that on my own. I was in college and still lived at home so had no real expenses to speak of (I went to school cheap). I was also still covered under my parents' health coverage most of that time. Being in FL will help since business should be stable pretty much year round. Here in IL the bike business is almost zero in the winter so you either pick up a winter business (ski's for example) or you drop down to minimal staff and just wait it out. Labor also tends to be seasonal, e.g. high school and college kids because you just can't afford to pay anyone else.

If you can find a more affluent area to locate in that will help, however the rent will also be higher so that will take some careful consideration. One possibility might be to see if you can rent some space from an existing business that has extra space they aren't using. Start small and build things up gradually so you don't over extend yourself and risk failure.

EDIT: It's been awhile but as I recall the average profit margin for the typical (reasonably successful) bike shop was around 12%. I think 14% was considered VERY good. This of course varies regionally and bicycle restoration might be a little different.


C|

[Vanilla Sky]

We are unique in that we're in a town where 2 major bicycle paths will intersect within the next 5 years. The one bike shop here has more business than he can handle, and we already do his restoration work. It also helps greatly that we have contracts with resorts for their bikes and maintenance. Without a storefront, we're already selling about 10 bikes a week and restoring 2 or 3.